218 replies to this topic

[Green_Fingers]

Smudge, on 30 January 2012 - 05:55 PM, said:

So by that assumption The League deemed Mr. Gills reason of being hospitalised worth a 1 point deduction and the game to be replayed.Whilst awarding Horley 3 points,they did not believe Badshot Lea.Simple rule change is all that is needed,if a Club plays an ineligible Player,the 3 points given to the non offending Team,if the game is lost or drawn.

You're probably right in your assumptions about both the unplayed fixtures Smudge. But awarding a non-offending team 3 points if they draw or lose a match isn't fair on other teams who have to win their points on the pitch

[Tickets please !]

Gf think we will have to differ on this one me thinks !i cannot see why it goes in cup games where lots of money can be involved but not in a league programme!

[NICE GUY]

NICE GUY, on 30 January 2012 - 12:59 PM, said:

E&E Ed, on 30 January 2012 - 12:28 PM, said:

As an Epsom supporter whose team have just lost the points, I totally agree with Tickets that Croydon should have been given them instead, or at the very least, the game replayed.

Imagine (in extreme circumstances, admittedly, but bear with me) that your team is second (let's say Windsor) and they need a win against a bottom team to get the title (let's say Chessington, as they are more likely to have an outstanding match or seven to play because of postponements). However, the team in first place (let's say Guildford) decides to loan the bottom team their entire squad who then beat your team.   **** - Please see disclaimer at the bottom ***

Of course, the bottom team won't get the points, as they would be deducted for the ineligible players, but neither would your team under the current rules, leaving you second. The team in first goes up and swallows the fine on behalf of the bottom team, who may have even had a better gate because they publicised what they would do locally and people wanted to watch how it all played out.

In short, everyone wins except the team who were wronged.

Now as I say, these are unusual circumstances, but just imagine you were in first place and your games were finished, with only one team going up to step four? I bet you'd give it thought, even if the fine was a few thousand, as you'd easily pick that up in Step Four revenue over the season.

Croydon should definitely have six points more than they have. Ourselves and Hanworth played ineligible players, end of story.  Regardless of what rules the clubs sign up to, (and does anyone really believe that a team wouldn't join a league because it didn't like one particular rule? - seriously GF!) the rule needs amendment to avoid this.

As for Saturday's match against Dorking, it was very even for twenty-five minutes. By half time though, we were two up and it could have been four as their lack of confidence showed through and it was a very easy win in the end against a team with a great keeper but no back four of any description on the day.  

Strange really, we won but went down two places because of the deduction! Oh well, easy come, easy go!


*** Disclaimer - the names of the teams are just for illustration. No one is suggesting that any team in this league would do this sort of thing. However, in an imaginary league, far far away ......

HKP - congratulations. I've lost count of the amount of people that dn't seem to know the difference between ineligible and illegible. You are just the latest.

ED your comments make sense to me but room for more debate.  Also there's been no reply from you to my earlier thread/post as to why there does appear to be an admin problem at E&E with the above and your reserves being suspended for a month due to admin problems, is this why your reserve team manager left E&E or was he actually asked to leave ?.

Interesting............

Silence is golden........or truth E&E !

[no melts]

Green_Fingers, on 30 January 2012 - 06:27 PM, said:

Tickets please !, on 30 January 2012 - 06:06 PM, said:

If we had won the game why would they make us play it again! WE WAS NOT IN THE WRONG! So what your saying is give them two bites at the cherry play a player they shouldn't if they win or lose don't worry coz we get to play them again!

What I am saying is that to be even handed you have to have the same punishment win lose or draw. The punishment to the offending team is fair - deduct 3 points. But I question the fairness in rewarding the non-offending team - why should a non-offending losing team be better treated than a non-offending winning team?

If they had lost what would happen then, points deducted of just fine

[Green_Fingers]

Tickets please !, on 30 January 2012 - 06:59 PM, said:

Gf think we will have to differ on this one me thinks !i cannot see why it goes in cup games where lots of money can be involved but not in a league programme!

No problem TP. Always good to look at both sides of an issue.

no melts, on 30 January 2012 - 07:11 PM, said:

Green_Fingers, on 30 January 2012 - 06:27 PM, said:

Tickets please !, on 30 January 2012 - 06:06 PM, said:

If we had won the game why would they make us play it again! WE WAS NOT IN THE WRONG! So what your saying is give them two bites at the cherry play a player they shouldn't if they win or lose don't worry coz we get to play them again!

What I am saying is that to be even handed you have to have the same punishment win lose or draw. The punishment to the offending team is fair - deduct 3 points. But I question the fairness in rewarding the non-offending team - why should a non-offending losing team be better treated than a non-offending winning team?

If they had lost what would happen then, points deducted of just fine

Exactly No Melts - the 3 point deduction is the punishment, so they would be 6 points worse off if they actually lost the fixture

Edited by Green_Fingers, 30 January 2012 - 07:23 PM.

[WindsorFC Programme Editor]

Smudge, on 30 January 2012 - 04:44 PM, said:

Having been on this Forum 2+ years,I think the Clubs deserve what they get from this League.The apathy of Clubs amazes me,only 7 Clubs turn up for a meeting that could decide their futures.As for the awarding of points for Teams making clerical errors,why is it that Cup Games are different to League Games.1. you get booted out,and the offending team win or lose, does not profit.2.The offending team loses the points gained through their misdemeanor,Rightly.But then the team that has made no errors,only on the pitchin losing,in the said game, get Nowt.Grow some, is my message to all Clubs it is your League after all,and you can alter the Rules,if you stop being yes men,and only comment when it affects your Club.

If I may try and make some suggestions in response:
1. Perhaps there are a number of clubs in the CCL that are happy with the proposed change. Also, as has been stated on the Restructuring thread, it already appears that this reorg is already a done thing. One option is to press for an extra promotion spot
2. Cup competitions are completely different to league competitions. That is why a breach of the rules regarding inelligible players results in a club being expelled from the competition. You could hardly impose that sanction on a club if such an offence occurred in a league game. Hence, loss of points is far fairer. But you do raise an interesting point regarding the team that say loses in such a game gains nothing. What then? What if the inelligible player came on as a 90th minute substitute with his team already 3 or 4 goals to the good? Not everything is black and white.
3. Why don't you seek election to the CCL Committee? Influence from within instead of hiding behind a keyboard.

[Smudge]

Never hidden in my life,behind anything,let alone a keyboard,yeah tell Surrey F.A. about it when 2 teams played a Surrey Senior Cup Semi Final Game,and both the semi-finalists,fielded an illedgible player,both were disqualified,and the teams they beat in the quarters both contested the rearranged Semi,and guess what One of them Won the Final.I honestly could not give a damn,who got what points.All I know is the League are the only WINNERS when mistakes are made,or people fall ill,with the Fines they impose.As for standing for election to the Committee,I would welcome it,but finding a sponsoring Club would be difficult.There again will the C.C.L. be here in 13/14,I THINK NOT,BUT WINDSOR MAYBE.

[spy]

Smudge don't start banging the drum on the Dixon Gill illness kick again, it is totally immaterial. When you play at this level you have to have contingency plans in place, owing to my back problems and IBS I had to drop out of several games on  a Friday night or Saturday morning whilst managing Warlingham but the team still turned up and played the games without me. Indeed I even missed out on the day we were presented with the title trophy with IBS, that is no excuse and it is boring now !!!!!!!!!

Edited by spy, 30 January 2012 - 10:51 PM.

[Smudge]

Spy banging what drum,just trying to explain different scenarios,why were Molesey not awarded 3 pts like Horley,and Croydon deducted 1 pt.Should Badshot Lea not be deducted points for not fielding a side like Croydon did.Both were not believed by the League,but they have been dealt with in different ways.This cannot be right surely.Or maybe in your mind it is.

[Chris Clapham]

Wish someone would award us 3 points!

[E&E Ed]

I actually have a busy job NG, I don't just sit here waiting to read your responses.

I have advised you before, but will do so once again for the hard of learning i.e. you, that I only do intelligent conversations and you don't have the tools so don't qualify.I feel a bit sorry for the Windsor reporter that has got sucked in to one of your "discussions", when he should just be telling you what everyone else here already knows. You are irrelevant.

It is his match report. Deal with it.

To continue the intelligent conversation with Tickets and GF and Smudge, I think it's fair to say that a non-offending winning team haven't lost their points, but a non-offending losing team have done. That is why they should be getting the points back that were on offer in the first place when the two teams kicked off.

If it were an offending losing team, then they didn't gain anything anyway, but presumably they would still attract a fine from the League which should discourage them from doing it again. I'm pretty sure we've got one!

I disagree that the League should make judgements in a "more serious" case only, as you open yourselves up to accusations of favouritism and that age old chestnut, consistency. What qualifies as a more serious case and what doesn't? Sure, if it was serious then a sterner fine could be handed out, but points are points and the rule should be consistent across all ineligibile players.

Also GF, you say that had Tickets been in the opposite position he wouldn't have been so keen to see a replay awarded if not the points. However, I am in the opposite corner to Tickets but I still agree that they should get the points.

In fact, having given it more thought, because of the situation that clubs often face with backlogs, I think I would just go for the three point award (or two if they got a draw) instead of a replay which is less practical.

I'd be intrigued to know the League's thinking on this. Whitelaw can you enlighten us please?

[Green_Fingers]

E&E I can best summarise my views as such.

Clubs playing ineligible players should be penalised with a points deduction – a fair penalty for their rule-breaking.

Clubs failing to fulfil fixtures without good reason should have the game awarded against them – again a fair penalty for their rule breaking.

However I cannot see that awarding points to the “non-offending” Club when another Club plays an ineligible player can been seen as fair – perhaps that is why there appears to be no rule that would allow it. Consider the following scenario:

A dreadful 2^nd half of the season sees your Club and Croydon in the bottom 2 on equal points on the last day of the season – Croydon having lost their final match the previous week. You need at least a draw to avoid relegation and a gutsy performance sees you do just that. Celebrations over, you then learn a few days later that Croydon’s opponents 10 days earlier played an ineligible player – a sub that hadn’t been signed by the deadline. Croydon have been awarded the 3 points and you get relegated. How fair is that?

Even replaying the match in these circumstances wouldn’t be fair  - the chances are both teams would be embarrassed by the situation

[E&E Ed]

Bizarrely, that's exactly what happened to a Sunday team of mine back in the mid-nineties. We complained about an ineligible player to back up another team in the league, and it transpired that the player, a certain Paul Harford by the way, had also played against our title rivals, resulting in them getting two points and the title, with us ending up as runners up instead!

It was only Leatherhead & District League, but we didn't see anything wrong with the decision, frustrating as it was at the time as we assumed this was the case everywhere. What do other leagues do now? Is there some sort of FA guideline?

Even allowing for all the above and the fact it happened back then, I still think my scenario, with the amount of money on offer these days, is a far more likely event. Two teams competed for the three points on offer, but the way it is right now means that no one gets the points. The only loser here is the team that were wronged.

We'll probably have to agree to differ on this one, but I think it is a matter that the League should consider, even if it isn't an actual proposal. If however, Croydon wanted to propose such a motion for an AGM (if that is indeed the right place for it), I'm sure we wouldn't be the only ones prepared to second it at the very least to  get the rule discussed.

[NICE GUY]

E&E Ed, on 31 January 2012 - 01:41 PM, said:

I actually have a busy job NG, I don't just sit here waiting to read your responses.

I have advised you before, but will do so once again for the hard of learning i.e. you, that I only do intelligent conversations and you don't have the tools so don't qualify.I feel a bit sorry for the Windsor reporter that has got sucked in to one of your "discussions", when he should just be telling you what everyone else here already knows. You are irrelevant.

It is his match report. Deal with it.

To continue the intelligent conversation with Tickets and GF and Smudge, I think it's fair to say that a non-offending winning team haven't lost their points, but a non-offending losing team have done. That is why they should be getting the points back that were on offer in the first place when the two teams kicked off.

If it were an offending losing team, then they didn't gain anything anyway, but presumably they would still attract a fine from the League which should discourage them from doing it again. I'm pretty sure we've got one!

I disagree that the League should make judgements in a "more serious" case only, as you open yourselves up to accusations of favouritism and that age old chestnut, consistency. What qualifies as a more serious case and what doesn't? Sure, if it was serious then a sterner fine could be handed out, but points are points and the rule should be consistent across all ineligibile players.

Also GF, you say that had Tickets been in the opposite position he wouldn't have been so keen to see a replay awarded if not the points. However, I am in the opposite corner to Tickets but I still agree that they should get the points.

In fact, having given it more thought, because of the situation that clubs often face with backlogs, I think I would just go for the three point award (or two if they got a draw) instead of a replay which is less practical.

I'd be intrigued to know the League's thinking on this. Whitelaw can you enlighten us please?

Blimey did you said you had a busy job !!!  Its about opinions as per your comments above.  All I said as a 'neutral' I thought Rother's report was a little biased whats wrong with that Mr. Almighty one !.......ps: make sure your clubs admin is done right this evening ........still waiting your comments about this subject, reagrding your reserve team manager leaving, but its okay Ed silence is golden........lol !!!  

Irrelevent ?  Then don't read my posts.....simples !

[Big J R]

Smudge, on 29 January 2012 - 03:22 PM, said:

T.R.S. has John McBride left Dorking.

Last I heard was that his recent injury has probably ruled him out for the rest of the season.

[aupostie]

HTFCSUPPORTER, on 29 January 2012 - 08:00 AM, said:

aupostie, on 28 January 2012 - 08:40 PM, said:

Ash Utd 5 Horley T 2

well a game that flowed from one side to another. We started very brightly & should have had a couple of early goal but on the break Horley took the lead with a well struck goal. However we wasn't behind for long.  The first half saw both sides have plenty of the ball but not really causing the keepers problem but plenty of good football. then on the stroke of half time Ash found the back off the net again to go in front.

The second half saw ash win an early pen when their keeper took out our forward & was sent off & from the spot we scored & before i could tell people we had gone further in front we scored again. Horley re-grouped & came back into the game & for their efforts got a well deserved second goal. Horley pressed hard for another but we caught them on the break with a well struck finish & to give us the win

a fair & hard game that was very entertaining & can easily see why Horley have had such a good season so far

Thanks for your comments aupostie.
Gotta say 1st half was about evens.
2nd half I thought we started brightly and were well on top until our goal keeper came out and took your forward out, I agree it was a penalty but sending him off I believe was a bit harsh as our right back was behind the keeper.
But thats the way it goes. 3-1 down and with the 10 men I thought we did very well and created lots of chances. But the difference was we were stretched at the back and you took yours.
Good luck for rest of season.

HTFC Supporter

just read the match report on your website.............whoever does the report was he there......because reading that i was at a different game totally...especially when your second goal was a lob lol.....& tell him Thanks for the comments about the pitch, i'll tell the groundsman

[padlock]

aupostie, on 31 January 2012 - 05:49 PM, said:

HTFCSUPPORTER, on 29 January 2012 - 08:00 AM, said:

aupostie, on 28 January 2012 - 08:40 PM, said:

Ash Utd 5 Horley T 2

well a game that flowed from one side to another. We started very brightly & should have had a couple of early goal but on the break Horley took the lead with a well struck goal. However we wasn't behind for long.  The first half saw both sides have plenty of the ball but not really causing the keepers problem but plenty of good football. then on the stroke of half time Ash found the back off the net again to go in front.

The second half saw ash win an early pen when their keeper took out our forward & was sent off & from the spot we scored & before i could tell people we had gone further in front we scored again. Horley re-grouped & came back into the game & for their efforts got a well deserved second goal. Horley pressed hard for another but we caught them on the break with a well struck finish & to give us the win

a fair & hard game that was very entertaining & can easily see why Horley have had such a good season so far

Thanks for your comments aupostie.
Gotta say 1st half was about evens.
2nd half I thought we started brightly and were well on top until our goal keeper came out and took your forward out, I agree it was a penalty but sending him off I believe was a bit harsh as our right back was behind the keeper.
But thats the way it goes. 3-1 down and with the 10 men I thought we did very well and created lots of chances. But the difference was we were stretched at the back and you took yours.
Good luck for rest of season.

HTFC Supporter

just read the match report on your website.............whoever does the report was he there......because reading that i was at a different game totally...especially when your second goal was a lob lol.....& tell him Thanks for the comments about the pitch, i'll tell the groundsman

Hmmmmmm been here before. Great guys who support every game home and away but have to agree most write ups are almost laughable. Before it gets said.......
At least they DO a report.

[aupostie]

padlock, on 31 January 2012 - 06:49 PM, said:

aupostie, on 31 January 2012 - 05:49 PM, said:

HTFCSUPPORTER, on 29 January 2012 - 08:00 AM, said:

aupostie, on 28 January 2012 - 08:40 PM, said:

Ash Utd 5 Horley T 2

well a game that flowed from one side to another. We started very brightly & should have had a couple of early goal but on the break Horley took the lead with a well struck goal. However we wasn't behind for long.  The first half saw both sides have plenty of the ball but not really causing the keepers problem but plenty of good football. then on the stroke of half time Ash found the back off the net again to go in front.

The second half saw ash win an early pen when their keeper took out our forward & was sent off & from the spot we scored & before i could tell people we had gone further in front we scored again. Horley re-grouped & came back into the game & for their efforts got a well deserved second goal. Horley pressed hard for another but we caught them on the break with a well struck finish & to give us the win

a fair & hard game that was very entertaining & can easily see why Horley have had such a good season so far

Thanks for your comments aupostie.
Gotta say 1st half was about evens.
2nd half I thought we started brightly and were well on top until our goal keeper came out and took your forward out, I agree it was a penalty but sending him off I believe was a bit harsh as our right back was behind the keeper.
But thats the way it goes. 3-1 down and with the 10 men I thought we did very well and created lots of chances. But the difference was we were stretched at the back and you took yours.
Good luck for rest of season.

HTFC Supporter

just read the match report on your website.............whoever does the report was he there......because reading that i was at a different game totally...especially when your second goal was a lob lol.....& tell him Thanks for the comments about the pitch, i'll tell the groundsman

Hmmmmmm been here before. Great guys who support every game home and away but have to agree most write ups are almost laughable. Before it gets said.......
At least they DO a report.

dont have time to do it all so match report is normally on here

[Green_Fingers]

E&E Ed, on 31 January 2012 - 03:20 PM, said:

Bizarrely, that's exactly what happened to a Sunday team of mine back in the mid-nineties. We complained about an ineligible player to back up another team in the league, and it transpired that the player, a certain Paul Harford by the way, had also played against our title rivals, resulting in them getting two points and the title, with us ending up as runners up instead!

It was only Leatherhead & District League, but we didn't see anything wrong with the decision, frustrating as it was at the time as we assumed this was the case everywhere. What do other leagues do now? Is there some sort of FA guideline?

Even allowing for all the above and the fact it happened back then, I still think my scenario, with the amount of money on offer these days, is a far more likely event. Two teams competed for the three points on offer, but the way it is right now means that no one gets the points. The only loser here is the team that were wronged.

We'll probably have to agree to differ on this one, but I think it is a matter that the League should consider, even if it isn't an actual proposal. If however, Croydon wanted to propose such a motion for an AGM (if that is indeed the right place for it), I'm sure we wouldn't be the only ones prepared to second it at the very least to  get the rule discussed.

Too late for next season - any proposed amendments to rules had to be with the League by yesterday (and if approved by the AGM would still require FA approval). Regarding other Leagues, I believe our rules are fairly standard throughout the Country - I know of no other League that currently award points to Clubs who have played against teams using ineligible players?