|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 11, 2008 12:21:04 GMT
I lost my head a tiny little bit at the end.
Dear Sirs,
What a frankly terrible and embarrassing precedent you have set vis-à-vis the recent fine of £2,000 to Sheffield Wednesday for naming 6 loan players in their squad against Stoke City in March. Let us look at the facts, as the Football League blatantly failed to do this:
The Facts:
Only 5 players are allowed to be named in a matchday squad. Sheffield Wednesday named 6. Stoke only named 5 and left out two players; Paul Gallagher on loan from Blackburn, and Gabriel Zakuani on loan from Fulham. The latter would have played but for Stoke City’s adherence to the rules. Sheffield Wednesday blatantly abused the rules in order to gain a competitive advantage, much as a player using drugs abuses the rules to gain an advantage.
The 6 loan players were all outfield players, with one scoring the equalising goal. The fact that only four players actually entered the field of play bears no relevance whatsoever as the manager had the option to play these players but chose not to, whereas as the Stoke City manager did not have this option.
Previous Rulings:
Leeds United: This ruling is of little comparable value as Leeds eventually lost the match. Further, it was only a late injury to Matthew Killagon that led to the breach. There are no such similarities in the Sheffield Wednesday case.
Swansea: Here Swansea spotted the mistake before kick-off and actually played the entire 90 minutes with only 4 substitutes. Again there are no such similarities with the Sheffield Wednesday case.
The current precedent will have far reaching effects for clubs at both the higher and lower end of the football spectrum. For instance, with a possible £60,000,000 available to teams gaining promotion to the Premiership, would it not be a wise business decision to ignore the current loan rulings and play as many loanees as possible with fear of a paltry £2,000 fine per breach. For instance Stoke City could name, and play 7 loan players for the remaining 4 games and receive a total fine of £8,000. If they do this and gain promotion it would be a minimal price to pay.
What is the point in the rule if the penalty is completely frivolous? This smacks of another spineless and abhorrent decision by a governing body who are supposed to be their for the benefit of the sport, and should not being turning a blind eye to what can only be described as cheating.
Thoroughly fucked off with you useless cunts!
Regards
|
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Apr 11, 2008 12:22:56 GMT
seems fair to me that email.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 11, 2008 12:23:10 GMT
Yeah you lost it at the end.
"regards"? what is that all about?
|
|
|
|
Post by glouscesterstokie on Apr 11, 2008 12:23:42 GMT
haha very good somehow i think they should give us the 3 points
not being biased or anything...[;D]
|
|
|
|
Post by FullerMagic on Apr 11, 2008 12:43:21 GMT
Nicely put, loony.
Spineless.
|
|
|
|
Post by trebor63 on Apr 11, 2008 14:34:10 GMT
I never felt Stoke would or should get anything BUT Sheff Wed should most certainly have been deducted at least one point avery spineless decision.
If we named six loanees to give ourselves options for every eventuality it'd be very interesting to see what our punishment would be! Automatic relegation would be my guess
|
|
|
|
Post by PotteringThrough on Apr 11, 2008 14:37:10 GMT
Did you send it Loony?
And do you expect a reply?
|
|
|
|
Post by wizzardofdribble on Apr 11, 2008 14:38:40 GMT
I'd change that last bit too.....thoroughly pissed-off with you utter cunts
Rolls off the tongue a bit better...
|
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Apr 11, 2008 14:39:12 GMT
Good e-mail that! And totally true. It does make an ass of the law.
|
|
SidWayne
Spectator
....well I'm a mushroom cloud laying mutha fucka, mutha fucka!
Posts: 48
|
Post by SidWayne on Apr 11, 2008 14:44:49 GMT
Yeah you lost it at the end. "regards"? what is that all about? ;D nice one! |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 11, 2008 14:48:27 GMT
Yep - it has been sent!
The vis-a-vis bit was in italics as well which should give them something to think about!
|
|
|
|
Post by wrighter on Apr 11, 2008 14:54:32 GMT
good one matey. well worded
just hoping you didnt sign it
"regards, the loony" !!
|
|
|
|
Post by Mr_DaftBurger on Apr 11, 2008 14:57:38 GMT
Can't you recall it as you did lose it at the end and may embarrass yourself. You put 'their' instead of there.  You also failed to threaten them with the bumming of their lives!  |
|
