|
Post by crabman206 on Mar 29, 2008 17:51:25 GMT
Kavanagh Songo'o Sahar Slusarski Bolder Showumni cheating bastards
|
|
|
Post by thebigmalbowski on Mar 29, 2008 17:52:37 GMT
Five loan players allowed on the playing area at one time.
Didnt sahar go off?
|
|
|
Post by Vodkab1ock on Mar 29, 2008 17:53:00 GMT
if they have done this then i am 100% sure they have broke the football league rules as we had to leave out Gallagher due to the 5 in the 16 rule.
|
|
|
Post by cheadlepotter on Mar 29, 2008 17:53:20 GMT
It's 5 players named in the matchday 16 mate. Still, nothing we can gain from it now.
|
|
|
Post by potter84 on Mar 29, 2008 17:53:33 GMT
Has Kavanagh and/or Bolder signed though with the money they got for Whelan. If not then they should give us the 3 points for cheating
|
|
|
Post by Vodkab1ock on Mar 29, 2008 17:53:36 GMT
in the build up they said 5 in the 16 but Radio Stoke might be wrong as usual.
|
|
|
Post by Timmy on Mar 29, 2008 17:53:42 GMT
I thought it was 5 loan players submitted into the team in one game. (short term loans).
|
|
|
Post by crabman206 on Mar 29, 2008 17:54:08 GMT
Your only allowed 5 loan players in the matchday 16 so they've definatley broken the rules
|
|
|
Post by Vodkab1ock on Mar 29, 2008 17:57:48 GMT
hmm well i am sure the team who broke the rules last time lost and that was the only reason that they were fined. But as one of the loan players scored then surely they are gaining a advantage from the rules be broken.
|
|
|
Post by cheadlepotter on Mar 29, 2008 17:58:18 GMT
Who cares if it's 6 of them or 16 of them! When Leeds did it, they got a fine, so if Sheff Wed have done it they'll get the same.
So whatever happens, we can't be helped!
|
|
|
Post by ruts66 on Mar 29, 2008 17:58:21 GMT
If SW have fcuked up it will mean a fine. No replays, I'm afraid...
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 29, 2008 17:59:10 GMT
|
|
|
Post by SneydGreenStokie on Mar 29, 2008 17:59:55 GMT
Doesnt matter. We should have won the game but by sitting back, we invited an equaliser and got what we deserved.
SGS
|
|
|
Post by FullerMagic on Mar 29, 2008 18:03:27 GMT
Surely there's no point in having the sodding rules unless you're going to hit a team hard with a punishment that hurts. Either a rule is worth protecting ...or not. Fines in the order of the £2000 Leeds got fined are a farce, and offer no deterrent not to do it again. Breach the rules in full knowledge you'll only have to pay a week's wage of a fringe player. Ridiculous. Give us the 3 pts or replay the match. Fair's fair.
|
|
|
Post by Mr_DaftBurger on Mar 29, 2008 18:03:44 GMT
Isn't fielding ineligible players a 3 - 0 loss? Time for Coates to ring his FA 'mates'!
|
|
|
Post by Stafford-Stokie on Mar 29, 2008 18:05:17 GMT
In theory there bloke that scored should not have been in the team.
|
|
|
Post by Vodkab1ock on Mar 29, 2008 18:08:53 GMT
BUT look leeds had lost 2-1 so they gained no advantage! we did not win and there player scored!!! it a fucking rule you cant just break it
|
|
|
Post by chrispk76 on Mar 29, 2008 18:09:29 GMT
Has Kavanagh and/or Bolder signed though with the money they got for Whelan. If not then they should give us the 3 points for cheating just checked the owls official site and has all of them listed as loans except slusarski who they loaned on thursday
|
|
|
Post by ruts66 on Mar 29, 2008 18:10:48 GMT
The way football's going I wouldn't be at all surprised if one day a divisional title was decided in court. We've had the West Ham v Sheff Utd relegation case so it only follows...
|
|
|
Post by stokesaint1 on Mar 29, 2008 18:12:08 GMT
When Leeds broke the rules, the 6th loan player did not get onto the pitch. He was an unused sub. Therefore different circumstances for Sheff Wed. That said, I don't think that was the reason we dropped two points. I'm more interested in us correcting that problem for the remainder of the season and to get some wins on the board, rather than the draws and losses of late. We can still do it.
|
|
|
Post by chrispk76 on Mar 29, 2008 18:12:27 GMT
pulis left zakuani and gally out today because of the loan rules. maybe stoke should point out our squad was weakened as we had to leave players out who would be in the 16. whereas wednesday took advantage and fielded 6 to strengthen their squad.
|
|
|
Post by armitagestokie on Mar 29, 2008 18:13:02 GMT
Surely someone should have picked this up before the game? Do they put loanee in brackets after player when handing in team sheet, simple for ref to pick up? Bet toe-knee is gutted!!
|
|
|
Post by FullerMagic on Mar 29, 2008 18:13:39 GMT
They've fielded a team that have driven a coach and horses through the rule book.
Surely end of story.
You can't be a bit pregnant; they've fielded an illegal team, cheated and got a point out of it at our expense.
We are the only team they've cheated against - so surely we're entitled to some form of recompense?
|
|
|
Post by Vodkab1ock on Mar 29, 2008 18:14:05 GMT
agree it wasn't the reason but you cant break the rules and get an advantage from it and as a poster said above fielding a illegal player equals a 3-0 loss. If we had included Gally on the bench and he had scored the winner i 100% guarentee we would of not been given the 3pts
|
|
|
Post by Dannyboy on Mar 29, 2008 18:18:41 GMT
we havent won for them cheating so we sould be given the three points
|
|
|
Post by uttoxeterpotter on Mar 29, 2008 18:22:21 GMT
As chris points out their official site lists all bar the WBA player as on loan but his profile on the site states on loan.
I can see Wednesday being fined for this and probably the point gained being taken away.
Other options of keeping the point will have Southampton etc up in arms especially if Wednesday stay up by a point or goal difference.
Or, if Stoke are awarded a 3 nil win our rivals will be appealing. This is the most unlikely outcome and WILL NOT happen.
Finally, a rematch. But then this would give Wednesday another bite of the cherry to gain 2 more points from a win. Again very unlikely. But knowing Stoke we would lose the re-match and be a point worse off!!
I think a fine and loss of the point gained if any action taken.
|
|
owlzat
Academy Starlet
WAWAW
Posts: 126
|
Post by owlzat on Mar 29, 2008 18:24:58 GMT
There is a limit of 5 players being on the pitch at the same time but we subbed one for another so never exceeded this. Here's something else for you to grasp at ................
|
|
|
Post by FullerMagic on Mar 29, 2008 18:25:09 GMT
The rule is definitely 5 in the matchday 16, isn't it? www.clarets-mad.co.uk/news/loadnews.asp?cid=TMNW&id=314289Leeds story Surely there's no such thing as a team that's a bit illegal? What they've done is just as illegal as field Cristiano Ronaldo as a ringer - or fielding 12 men for the 90 minutes. I'm sure they'll get a slap on the wrist and told to play nice in the future.
|
|
|
Post by swipers on Mar 29, 2008 18:26:32 GMT
Are we all 100% right on this Disgrace if something is not done about it, especially as there loan players (or one of them) cost us 3 points. Surely the Football league need to step in to award the points to us - then again seeing as they have been trying to shaft us all season with the shite referees they keep assigning to us I won't hold my breath ???
|
|
|
Post by LDE76 on Mar 29, 2008 18:26:42 GMT
They've fielded a team that have driven a coach and horses through the rule book. Surely end of story. You can't be a bit pregnant; they've fielded an illegal team, cheated and got a point out of it at our expense. We are the only team they've cheated against - so surely we're entitled to some form of recompense? Agree. We may well have been the architects of our own downfall, but that doesn't alter the fact that a rule has been broken. Note to Alan Pardew: this is a legitimate gripe.
|
|