Ryan_Taylor Posted April 3, 2014 Share Posted April 3, 2014 Hell on if them 4 points keep them up. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Icke - Son of God Posted April 3, 2014 Share Posted April 3, 2014 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-1265392/Hartlepool-plead-innocence-Brighton-boss-Gus-Poyet-demands-points-deduction-fielding-suspended-Gary-Liddle.html Poyet told his club's official website, www.seagulls.co.uk: 'I am sure Hartlepool did not realise he was suspended. It was not a case of cheating, but they made a mistake and that player should not have been on the pitch so the three points should go to the opposition. "The Football League has to be careful with the decision they make. It does not matter if they did it with intention or not, the only decision they can make in this instance - and I would say the same if my team were the guilty party - is to give the three points to the opposition." Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sempuki Posted April 3, 2014 Share Posted April 3, 2014 You couldn't write comedy like this. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimistic Nut Posted April 3, 2014 Share Posted April 3, 2014 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-1265392/Hartlepool-plead-innocence-Brighton-boss-Gus-Poyet-demands-points-deduction-fielding-suspended-Gary-Liddle.html Poyet told his club's official website, www.seagulls.co.uk: 'I am sure Hartlepool did not realise he was suspended. It was not a case of cheating, but they made a mistake and that player should not have been on the pitch so the three points should go to the opposition. "The Football League has to be careful with the decision they make. It does not matter if they did it with intention or not, the only decision they can make in this instance - and I would say the same if my team were the guilty party - is to give the three points to the opposition." So effectively in this case, knock one point off Sunderland and give two to Southampton. The battle for 1st between us & Stoke is on! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wullie Posted April 3, 2014 Share Posted April 3, 2014 So the authorities have known since October, how were they able to continue on the cup? Remember this? http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2244501/Bradford-City-appeal-expulsion-FA-Cup-fielding-ineligible-player.html That was overturned though wasn't it? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimistic Nut Posted April 3, 2014 Share Posted April 3, 2014 So the authorities have known since October, how were they able to continue on the cup? Remember this? http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2244501/Bradford-City-appeal-expulsion-FA-Cup-fielding-ineligible-player.html That was overturned though wasn't it? Hartlepool got docked 3 points mind. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Exiled in Texas Posted April 3, 2014 Share Posted April 3, 2014 Based on other events - teams lost all points gained in games where they fielded an illegible player (so minus 1pt from the Southampton tie) and a team was also deducted 1pt for fielding an illegible player in a game that they lost (so minus another 3 points). Which would put them on 21 points Get in. Dammit!!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
midds Posted April 3, 2014 Share Posted April 3, 2014 I reckon everyone should just forget about it and pretend it never happened. Fielding a player who had no right to be on the park isn't a big deal anyway, happens all of the time. Can't see what the fuss is about. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Geordie Posted April 3, 2014 Share Posted April 3, 2014 Just read this..... eeesh! Worth remembering that Margaret Byrne sits on the board of the FA Council, she represents the Premier League on that board. From the outside looking in, it could appear that she is using her influence on that board to try and sweep this under the carpet. Don't think we've heard the last of this. Potential conflict of interests there, straightaway. Corruption. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bhoywhonder Posted April 3, 2014 Share Posted April 3, 2014 Hope a few of you have taken a leaf from the RTG book of Napolean Complex and wrote a letter of pure disgust to the FA. Or posted an e-mail address to the appropriate body, along with a handy 'cut-n-paste' complaint. Followed by 40 pages of 'done', 'done', 'done', 'done'.... But to be fair, I don't think any points deduction is required, I would rather not give them the excuse of a conspiracy theory. They're going down on their own terms. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilson Posted April 3, 2014 Share Posted April 3, 2014 Hope a few of you have taken a leaf from the RTG book of Napolean Complex and wrote a letter of pure disgust to the FA. Or posted an e-mail address to the appropriate body, along with a handy 'cut-n-paste' complaint. Followed by 40 pages of 'done', 'done', 'done', 'done'.... But to be fair, I don't think any points deduction is required, I would rather not give them the excuse of a conspiracy theory. They're going down on their own terms. Then we'd have the Wembo stick to beat them with, swings and roundabouts Cheating spam hampers Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hithere Posted April 3, 2014 Share Posted April 3, 2014 Playing the useless nonce was a self-enforced points deduction tbf. This Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil Posted April 4, 2014 Share Posted April 4, 2014 As far as I can see, it once again highlights how biased/corrupt/incompetent/wilfully blind the FA is if they don't enforce a points deduction. Protect the top league because that's where the money is. Shit on the rest. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomson Mouse Posted April 4, 2014 Share Posted April 4, 2014 Some interesting theories bouncing around on the sunshine coach Happens more often than you'd think. It just isn't usually reported and certainly not in such an overtly sensationalist way. Don't think it's a coincidence that this happened months ago yet has only just been reported after The Sun were banned. Reading between the lines, I think it's a story a journo got hold of a while back but was sitting on to incur a little good will from the club, but now the gloves are considered off with regard the nationals. Worth remembering that Margaret Byrne sits on the board of the FA Council, she represents the Premier League on that board. From the outside looking in, it could appear that she is using her influence on that board to try and sweep this under the carpet. Don't think we've heard the last of this. Either way this looks like it could turn into a shitstorm Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flip Posted April 4, 2014 Share Posted April 4, 2014 I think the fairest would be deduct points gained for the games he played. So basically deduct Sunderland a point. Not harder than that really. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DebuchyAndTheBeast Posted April 4, 2014 Share Posted April 4, 2014 I think the fairest would be deduct points gained for the games he played. So basically deduct Sunderland a point. Not harder than that really. No. A point deduction and replaying the game/s Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flip Posted April 4, 2014 Share Posted April 4, 2014 I think the fairest would be deduct points gained for the games he played. So basically deduct Sunderland a point. Not harder than that really. No. A point deduction and replaying the game/s Not sure if serious, but why replay the game? That's moronic. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted April 4, 2014 Share Posted April 4, 2014 Make him do another job he's not eligible for? Like be a fireman for a day or something. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benwell Lad Posted April 4, 2014 Share Posted April 4, 2014 Be really interesting to gear what Pooyet has to say about this after he insisted on screwing poor old Hartlepool over something similar. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coco Posted April 4, 2014 Share Posted April 4, 2014 Being completely objective, losing the points they gained isn't enough. If you've "cheated", you need to be punished. If they lost all the games he played in, would it be ok to let them off without any deduction? Having the results over-turned makes sense, but it needs to be accompanied by a large fine and/or points deduction. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flip Posted April 4, 2014 Share Posted April 4, 2014 Being completely objective, losing the points they gained isn't enough. If you've "cheated", you need to be punished. If they lost all the games he played in, would it be ok to let them off without any deduction? Having the results over-turned makes sense, but it needs to be accompanied by a large fine and/or points deduction. Fine + deduction. It's not like they've cheated is it? Isn't it just a case of wrong paper-doing. Haven't really read about it, but guessing it's a similar case to in Brazil where Portuguesa was relegated because they fielded a player who had supposedly gotten a 2 game suspension over one. I think overturning the results should be enough. If they've lost all 4 then it wouldn't have benefitted them anyways. Fine + results overturning would be more than enough, IMO at least. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beren Posted April 4, 2014 Share Posted April 4, 2014 They'll just informally instruct the referees to ensure that they go down to avoid any potentially embarrassing legal entanglements from other stragglers. Bad decisions coming their way. Very fucking Machiavellian. Haha, you wouldn't be surprised. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Posted April 4, 2014 Share Posted April 4, 2014 Being completely objective, losing the points they gained isn't enough. If you've "cheated", you need to be punished. If they lost all the games he played in, would it be ok to let them off without any deduction? Having the results over-turned makes sense, but it needs to be accompanied by a large fine and/or points deduction. Fine + deduction. It's not like they've cheated is it? Isn't it just a case of wrong paper-doing. Haven't really read about it, but guessing it's a similar case to in Brazil where Portuguesa was relegated because they fielded a player who had supposedly gotten a 2 game suspension over one. I think overturning the results should be enough. If they've lost all 4 then it wouldn't have benefitted them anyways. Fine + results overturning would be more than enough, IMO at least. Goal difference? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KDT Posted April 4, 2014 Share Posted April 4, 2014 Sunday league players need international clearance now if they've even played for a team registered with the Scottish FA. For a premier league team to not have done this is a bit laughable really. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flip Posted April 4, 2014 Share Posted April 4, 2014 Being completely objective, losing the points they gained isn't enough. If you've "cheated", you need to be punished. If they lost all the games he played in, would it be ok to let them off without any deduction? Having the results over-turned makes sense, but it needs to be accompanied by a large fine and/or points deduction. Fine + deduction. It's not like they've cheated is it? Isn't it just a case of wrong paper-doing. Haven't really read about it, but guessing it's a similar case to in Brazil where Portuguesa was relegated because they fielded a player who had supposedly gotten a 2 game suspension over one. I think overturning the results should be enough. If they've lost all 4 then it wouldn't have benefitted them anyways. Fine + results overturning would be more than enough, IMO at least. Goal difference? Well make all games 3-0 or something. These rules have to exist in the laws of the FA. In Brazil it's 3p + overturning of results. Portuguesa lost a total of 4 points and were relegated instead of Fluminense. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts