The FA are culpable as usual. The 6th player is surely 'INELIGIBLE'

By issueing only a fine to Leeds surely this opens the possibility of a £2000 charge to have a greater choice of substitutes? I still think a 3 point penalty for cheating and the opportunity for the opposition to replay the game is the fairest decision in these cases.

6.4.6 [The maximum number of Short Term Loans will be 8 per Season and Long Term Loans will
be 2 per Season. Whilst a Club may register any number of Work Experience players only
2 may play in any one match in accordance with FA Rules. A Club may name up to a
maximum of 5 players on a team sheet who are either Long Term Loans, Short Term Loans
or Work Experience players with no more than 2 from any one Category.]

6.8 PLAYING AN INELIGIBLE PLAYER
Any Club found to have played an ineligible player in a match shall have any points gained
from that match deducted from its record and have levied upon it a fine in accordance with
the Fines Tariff. The Company may vary this decision in respect of the points gained only
in circumstances where the ineligibility is due to the failure to obtain an International
Transfer Certificate or in the case of where a substitute player who is ineligible participates
in a match or is listed on the official team sheet but does not participate in that match.
The Board may also order that such match be replayed on such terms as are decided by the
Board which may also levy penalty points against the Club in default.

Posted By: phrankin on March 31st 2008 at 14:21:41

Message Thread

BBC think Sheff Wed will be fined. (Other Football) - samcd84, Mar 31, 14:14:46
- That's probably only because they saw that Leeds had only been fined. (Other Football) - Dog, Mar 31, 14:31:27
  - Leeds shouls have paid a points penalty last time. (Other Football) - phrankin, Mar 31, 14:32:59
    - Well let's just hope that the FA see sense this time. (Other Football) - Dog, Mar 31, 14:34:29
      - after recent bullshit, if we appeal it, they'll take points off us (n/m) (Other Football) - pants, Mar 31, 14:45:15
      - They have to be firm otherwise the precedent is no deterrant (Other Football) - Jim, Mar 31, 14:42:42
        
        If it is a fine and I were money bags Stoke (Other Football) - phrankin, Mar 31, 14:49:08
- A fine makes no sense. (Other Football) - yarmyyarmy, Mar 31, 14:16:44
  - Worst of all £1000 of the fine was suspended? (Other Football) - phrankin, Mar 31, 14:24:13
    - Exactly - the punishments have been very inconsistent (Other Football) - Jim, Mar 31, 14:34:40
      - Foo yare goo (Other Football) - yarmyyarmy, Mar 31, 14:38:34
  - lol (n/m) (Other Football) - pants, Mar 31, 14:23:03
  - The FA are culpable as usual. The 6th player is surely 'INELIGIBLE' (Other Football) - phrankin, Mar 31, 14:21:41
    - Trouble is - which of the loan players was the "ineligible" one because (Other Football) - Jim, Mar 31, 14:39:41
      - In this case having an extra loan player available gave them (Other Football) - phrankin, Mar 31, 14:42:59
        
        Problem is it would arguably be a hindrance for us! (n/m) (Other Football) - Jim, Mar 31, 14:44:59
    - The fa probably don't even know what the championship is (Other Football) - pants, Mar 31, 14:23:29

Reply to Message

In order to add a post to the WotB Message Board you must be a registered WotB user.

If you are not yet registered then please visit the registration page. You should ensure that their browser is setup to accept cookies.