View Full Version : Under 19's away for 10 days in Bulgaria
MariborKev
15/10/2010, 2:34 PM
Flexy, it's been pointed out to you already that the number of scouts at these matches alone renders them not pointless.
Can you please read what other people have to say before coming in with blind defence of your club?
Stu,
There were a number of scouts at the Derry v Shels game. In fact I would nearly wager that there more at that game than at the u19 games....
Well thats just it SvD. The FAI do themselves no favours with their ambiguous rules
And the FAI are fairly used to players withdrawing from underage national squads if they're called into English first teams squads etc.
I honestly think that if Derry contacted the FAI to say that McEleney was badly needed by them, the FAI would've excsed him. They've no business is ****ing the lad and the club off either. Derry probably thought that'd set alarm bells ringing if the FAI said no and he pulled out injured.
Stu,
There were a number of scouts at the Derry v Shels game. In fact I would nearly wager that there more at that game than at the u19 games....
Not to see your injured lad, surely?
Stu,
There were a number of scouts at the Derry v Shels game. In fact I would nearly wager that there more at that game than at the u19 games....
I would highly doubt that IMO, having dealt with scouts requesting access to League/Cup games and then International games in the Carlisle Grounds, International games win hands down for the number of scouts that attend these games.
An international game could attract up to 15 or 20 scouts from all over Europe, League of Cup games would attract a max of 3 or 4 from the UK
MariborKev
15/10/2010, 2:55 PM
Thankfully not Dodge. A few others are getting interest though....
CSFShels
15/10/2010, 4:31 PM
No point in us worrying over it now. Whats done is done, and we probably wouldn't have gone on to win the league anyway, so we should just concentrate on getting playoffs. Monaghan on the other hand have genuine reason to feel completely cheated if Derry go on to win the league which I think they will. Some things never change in the county of Derry.
SwanVsDalton
15/10/2010, 5:10 PM
Monaghan on the other hand have genuine reason to feel completely cheated if Derry go on to win the league which I think they will. Some things never change in the county of Derry.
Steady on there title winners of '06. Even if the whole thing smells of pork, and even if Derry have engaged in a serious slice of pre-meditated cheating, it's all been done under the condoning eyes of our fair football association. Their ambiguous rules and poor enforcement is where the real annoyance lies.
I don't have a problem if the rule is enforced the same for every club. Evens it won't be though.
CSFShels
15/10/2010, 5:18 PM
Just because the FAI are cheats, does not make Derry any less cheats.
No point in us worrying over it now. Whats done is done, and we probably wouldn't have gone on to win the league anyway, so we should just concentrate on getting playoffs. Monaghan on the other hand have genuine reason to feel completely cheated if Derry go on to win the league which I think they will. Some things never change in the county of Derry.
That's almost magnanimous..
*suspicious*
CSFShels
15/10/2010, 5:33 PM
That's almost magnanimous..
*suspicious*
If this were at the end of the season and we'd missed out on something as a result, I'd be absolutely ****ing fuming. Derry have cheated here point blank, the FAI have facilitated it, and they'll probably win the league as a result. But in the end it is Monaghan that suffer as a result, not really us. Extra 3 points or no, if we mess up against Limerick and Waterford we won't get playoffs. Everyone involved in Shels just needs to put this in the past, it wasn't fair, it was dishonest, we probably should have expected the unfair outcome, but now we have playoffs to qualify for, and promotion to win. We sure as hell aren't going to get either of those if we sit around crying over this. We know how things are done in Derry, you know how things are done in Derry, hell even people from Derry know how things are done at their clubs.
VinnyDCFC
15/10/2010, 5:33 PM
Just because the FAI are cheats, does not make Derry any less cheats.
Where did Derry cheat?
Vinny, you might notice that there was no out cry when this happened before. Facts are, bad losers will cling to anything.
SwanVsDalton
15/10/2010, 5:40 PM
Just because the FAI are cheats, does not make Derry any less cheats.
Who exactly are the FAI cheating? The last thing they would want is yet another promotion demotion scandal. Clearly they've rolled over for a reason, whether because of the ambiguity of the rule or the unenforceable aspects of it, and I hope they'll do so for other teams when it inevitably happens again - whether they do or not has nothing to do with Derry.
And when it doesn't happen again, will it makes the other teams 'cheats' as well? Not exactly title robbing in fairness.
CSFShels
15/10/2010, 5:42 PM
Where did Derry cheat?
Do you wish for me to elaborate on the dual contracts they were giving out over a period of a number of years? The creditors they cheated out of money owed to them? Or we could refer to the instance in question here? Any of these is good for you? Are you here to tell me that McEleney's recovery was genuine and that he went from being unable to perform in an under 19s international match on the 7th to being able to play 90 minutes on the 9th and score 2 goals? Of course you are. Dishonesty is the Derry way.
You've gotten your 3 points, theres no point in trying to plead innocence aswell. You won't find many unaware as to the reality.
CSFShels
15/10/2010, 5:43 PM
Who exactly are the FAI cheating? The last thing they would want is yet another promotion demotion scandal. Clearly they've rolled over for a reason, whether because of the ambiguity of the rule or the unenforceable aspects of it, and I hope they'll do so for other teams when it inevitably happens again - whether they do or not has nothing to do with Derry.
And when it doesn't happen again, will it makes the other teams 'cheats' as well? Not exactly title robbing in fairness.
The FAI have been cheating to achieve their desired outcome for a number of years. I think that is pretty much common knowledge. FAI and the fudge come pretty much hand in hand.
VinnyDCFC
15/10/2010, 5:49 PM
Do you wish for me to elaborate on the dual contracts they were giving out over a period of a number of years? The creditors they cheated out of money owed to them? Or we could refer to the instance in question here? Any of these is good for you? Are you here to tell me that McEleney's recovery was genuine and that he went from being unable to perform in an under 19s international match on the 7th to being able to play 90 minutes on the 9th and score 2 goals? Of course you are. Dishonesty is the Derry way.
You've gotten your 3 points, theres no point in trying to plead innocence aswell. You won't find many unaware as to the reality.
Where did Derry cheat in the McEleney case?
He got injured in Wexford on the 1st October and was well enough to play on the 9th October against Shelbourne, what's the problem?
If this were at the end of the season and we'd missed out on something as a result, I'd be absolutely ****ing fuming. Derry have cheated here point blank, the FAI have facilitated it, and they'll probably win the league as a result. But in the end it is Monaghan that suffer as a result, not really us. Extra 3 points or no, if we mess up against Limerick and Waterford we won't get playoffs. Everyone involved in Shels just needs to put this in the past, it wasn't fair, it was dishonest, we probably should have expected the unfair outcome, but now we have playoffs to qualify for, and promotion to win. We sure as hell aren't going to get either of those if we sit around crying over this. We know how things are done in Derry, you know how things are done in Derry, hell even people from Derry know how things are done at their clubs.
Dry your eyes and read 3-0
Shedendinvisibl
15/10/2010, 9:56 PM
Where did Derry cheat in the McEleney case?
He got injured in Wexford on the 1st October and was well enough to play on the 9th October against Shelbourne, what's the problem?
Refer back to the numerous posts that show the FAI rule in relation to players called up to international duties that cry off. It's plain and clear matter how you guys try and bend it.
The bigger issue is the fact that the FAI can't apply their own rules and it says more about their ineptness and spinelessness more than it does about Derry IMO.
CSFShels
15/10/2010, 9:59 PM
Refer back to the numerous posts that show the FAI rule in relation to players called up to international duties that cry off. It's plain and clear matter how you guys try and bend it.
The bigger issue is the fact that the FAI can't apply their own rules and it says more about their ineptness and spinelessness more than it does about Derry IMO.
Summed it up much better than I could. Derry fans shouldn't assume innocence just because the FAI haven't punished them. On that basis, we should assume every team has always been 65% compliant.
MariborKev
15/10/2010, 10:23 PM
Do you wish for me to elaborate on the dual contracts they were giving out over a period of a number of years? The creditors they cheated out of money owed to them? Or we could refer to the instance in question here? Any of these is good for you? Are you here to tell me that McEleney's recovery was genuine and that he went from being unable to perform in an under 19s international match on the 7th to being able to play 90 minutes on the 9th and score 2 goals? Of course you are. Dishonesty is the Derry way.
You've gotten your 3 points, theres no point in trying to plead innocence aswell. You won't find many unaware as to the reality.
CSF,
If you are going to have a go, at least have keep it to the issue in hand. A historic mudslinging hardly leads Richmond Road looking like the Gardens of Babylon.
McEleney pulled out of the squad after the Wexford game, a game he limped off in with about twenty minutes to go. A game a full eight days before the Shels game. He contacted the team management following that game and was released from the squad. The management retained the right to tell him to still join up with the squad with the hope that he recovered for the games. They didn't.
Perhaps the next time you see Paul Doolin, ask him about the whole thing. Still though, keep shouting your mouth off. It is much more amusing.
dcfc_dee
15/10/2010, 10:30 PM
Or we could refer to the instance in question here? Any of these is good for you? Are you here to tell me that McEleney's recovery was genuine and that he went from being unable to perform in an under 19s international match on the 7th to being able to play 90 minutes on the 9th and score 2 goals? Of course you are. Dishonesty is the Derry way.
.
Were you watching the same game as me. Paddy didnt play 90 mins. He was subbed around 75/80 mins
Derry
16/10/2010, 10:45 AM
Summed it up much better than I could. Derry fans shouldn't assume innocence just because the FAI haven't punished them. On that basis, we should assume every team has always been 65% compliant.
Exactly, we know there are many teams fixing the books to get past the FAI's rules, but Derry City were the only team punished, why was that.
God boy's you are really letting yourself down. Take your oil and get on with it. Sure next season Shels will get another (their 5th) attempt to get out of the first division.
Can any of you tell me why there was no comments from anyone, when other players in the past done the exact same thing as Derry did. ie Sheppard?
Exactly, we know there are many teams fixing the books to get past the FAI's rules, but Derry City were the only team punished, why was that.
God boy's you are really letting yourself down. Take your oil and get on with it. Sure next season Shels will get another (their 5th) attempt to get out of the first division.
Can any of you tell me why there was no comments from anyone, when other players in the past done the exact same thing as Derry did. ie Sheppard?
Erm, you know you're quoting a Shels fan right? You're hardly the only team that was punished. And kicking Wellvan out was doing you a favour as they were massively insolvent anyway. And another massive favour was parachuting you into the first despite the application deadline being passed. But sure keep on acting as if you're oppressed.
a.a.d
16/10/2010, 11:28 AM
Having read this whole thread from start to finish(which I hope comes soon) I can't see where the cheating aspect has come from. The lad got injured playing a game on the Friday he let's the management team know about this straight away then he is released from the squad.
Now the management team could have Made a decision to bring him anyway but instead decided to let him withdraw from the team and call in another fully fit player to take his place. Although the intial injury looks worse than it turned out (which happens all the time, but you generally wouldn't know for 24hours) it's to late then to be called back into the squad. Which it seems the FAI have agreed with in this case.
He then has a late fitness test before the game the following week to see if he can play the game and passes so he plays. Now at the same time Shelbourne have already emailed the FAI regarding his ability to play in said game, the FAI inform them he can so one can take it they also informed Derry City he can play.
So Shelbourne have been informed he can play and Derry have been informed he can play which would then suggest that no actual cheating took place. It was all above board and ratified by the FAI before hand.
I know people will say "but there's a rule and rules are rules" but for some reason or another the FAI are taking a common sense approach to this particular rule and are aware that players recover from injurys and so the can't really stop them playing for their club if fit and if the player was on a wage based on how many games he played they would be restricting his ability to earn a wage. We have all seen this in the league before and a case in point this season is Karl Sheppard for Galway united.
Anyway the main argument on here from Shelbourne fans regarding this latest test to the rule is that Derry City had an unfair advantage by having this one player available to play n this particular game therefore suggesting that Shelbourne were not happy that they didn't have the unfair advantage by playing against Derry without the player.
Anyway what's done is done and what's lost is lost and gone forever.
The end
passerrby
16/10/2010, 12:22 PM
but for some reason or another the FAI are taking a common sense approach to this particular rule .
there is the only part of your long statement that is telling the unknown reason is obvous to all .the same common sense they dont take any other time.
lets call a spade a spade your club tried it on and the league looked the other way..i wonder why
a.a.d
16/10/2010, 12:46 PM
there is the only part of your long statement that is telling the unknown reason is obvous to all .the same common sense they dont take any other time.
lets call a spade a spade your club tried it on and the league looked the other way..i wonder why
but it's obvious that they use the same common sense on this rule ALL the time hence nothing ever been brought to light about other clubs who have been in the same situation not just this year but in previous years as well. As for Derry trying it on, How??? Shelbourne were told before the game the player was okay to play so that gave derry the all clear.
It's a nothing story which if it wasn't anything to do with Derry City would not have even merited a mention never mind a thread being hijacked.
passerrby
16/10/2010, 2:23 PM
but it's obvious that they use the same common sense on this rule ALL the time hence nothing ever been brought to light about other clubs who have been in the same situation not just this year but in previous years as well. As for Derry trying it on, How??? Shelbourne were told before the game the player was okay to play so that gave derry the all clear.
It's a nothing story which if it wasn't anything to do with Derry City would not have even merited a mention never mind a thread being hijacked.
because other clubs are told that if the players is not available he will not be available to his club.
I agree derry did proberly get permission to play him (which I think the league had no right to give)
and it is no a nothing story because it ensures derry will be league champions and are promoted in line with the wishes of the league.
Ah now come on Passerby have some faith, there is still a lot of football to be played yet before anybody gets handed a trophy I'm I know that's the way Mick Cooke will be looking at it. One result over the length of the league season does not win you a league. Monaghan have points on the board Derry don't and although people are saying tonights game is a walkover anything can happen as well as this Derry have a tricky game against harps tonokay as well.
pineapple stu
17/10/2010, 10:10 AM
Can any Derry fan actually make refernece to the rule quoted while discussing this topic instead of bringing up a nonsensical anti-Derry forum bias?
SwanVsDalton
17/10/2010, 1:30 PM
Can any Derry fan actually make refernece to the rule quoted while discussing this topic instead of bringing up a nonsensical anti-Derry forum bias?
A couple of us already did...
MariborKev
17/10/2010, 3:38 PM
Can any Derry fan actually make refernece to the rule quoted while discussing this topic instead of bringing up a nonsensical anti-Derry forum bias?
To be fair PS,
There are as many of us trying to debate the actual point. A few fans of other clubs seem intent to see this as some sort of conspiracy.....
pineapple stu
18/10/2010, 9:23 AM
Fair points.
So apart from those Derry fans who are discussing the topic instead of bringing up a nonsensical anti-Derry forum bias, can any Derry fan actually make reference to the rule quoted while discussing this topic instead of bringing up a nonsensical anti-Derry forum bias?
http://findwyerspodcast.files.wordpress.com/2010/02/brian.jpg
osarusan
18/10/2010, 9:51 AM
I think use of the word 'cheating' is harsh. According to Derry fans, in the game on the 1st, McEleny went off injured in the second half. He / the club decides he's not fit to travel and pulls him out of the international squad. He gets over the injury and plays against Shels eight days later. There's nothing very unusual or suspicious about any of that (imo).
The rule is apparently this:
Any Participant Club refusing to release a player(s) selected for an International or Representative panel
under the jurisdiction of the FAI shall not be entitled to play such players(s) until a period of five (5)
calendar days has elapsed from the date of such fixture(s). Any selected player failing to join the panel shall
not be permitted to play for his Club for the same period. Call-ups of registered players by Associations
other than the FAI for International duty are governed by the regulations of FIFA.
Now, if this rule is the entirety of the FAI's position on the issue, with no leeway of any kind, as McEleny was selected for the panel but failed to join it, then he should not have been allowed to play for 5 days after the international fixture he would have played in (on the 7th).
But it looks like this is not the entirety of the FAI's position, and there is leeway, which there should be, in my opinion. It is just that it is not clear how a player/club becomes exempt from the application of this rule. For one, it seems that a FAI doctor must examine any player pulling out (which nobody here seemed aware of). As this didn't happen, Derry have no case to answer.
(What confuses me is how any player/club would ever fall foul of this rule. A FAI doctor pronounces them uninjured but the club still withdraws them?)
nigel-harps1954
19/10/2010, 4:44 AM
My head hurts.
Can any Derry fan actually make refernece to the rule quoted while discussing this topic instead of bringing up a nonsensical anti-Derry forum bias?
so most posters here were accusing Derry fans of their club breaking rules without actually knowing the rule or quoting the rule broken?
Priceless. Typical of this forum.
Nope, the rule they broke was clearly linked a couple of times.
Whether they're charged with anything or allowed to break it (or any other point of view you want to take on it) is immaterial.
(And as I said earlier, I don't mind either way)
ah okay - misread the post quoted.
i dont really care either - what i object to is the gnashing of teeth and clamours for points deductions from so many fans of teams who are unaffected by any "breach" etc... it is really quite pathetic and typical of the attitiude of a lot of posters on this forum.
pineapple stu
19/10/2010, 3:50 PM
Fans are perfectly entitled to complain if a rule is broken even if it doesn't affect their team. What's to say it won't affect us next time? If there's a rule, either implement it or write it out of the rule book. Having a rule broken, only for the FAI to say "Ah sure it's grand; there's no case to answer" with absolutely no reason given at all is a farce. And it's the sort of farce which has blighted our league for years, and which needs to be sorted.
but the default position of most posters in calling for points deductions really grates on my nerves. This is a minor breach (if it is even a breach) that would be amply resolved with a very small fine.
osarusan
19/10/2010, 4:19 PM
The reason fans are suggesting a points deduction is because that's what the FAI rulebook indicates is the penalty for breaking this rule. If it was indicated by the FAI that the punishment was a very small fine, no posters on here would be asking for a points deduction.
pineapple stu
19/10/2010, 4:21 PM
Also, it clearly is a breach of the rules, and it's not a minor issue to play a player who - according to the strict interpretation of the rules - is ineligible for a game. Come on Stu - do you really believe what you're typing?
If the FAI are now saying that that rule is irrelevant, than fair enough. But strike it from the rule book and ensure that when UCD or Bohs - or any other club - next have an international call-up and don't really feel like releasing the player, that that's ok too.
if the rule calls for a points deduction then the rule should be scrapped. Of all the things that points can be and have been deducted for should this really be included? I dont think so.
I havent been paying a lot of attention to every post in this thread obviously. It is obviously a breach. I just fancied a moan.
Charlie Darwin
19/10/2010, 5:14 PM
I thought the standard result of fielding an ineligible player was to give the non-offending party a 3-0 walkover. Surely that's what people mean by a points deduction?
MariborKev
19/10/2010, 5:20 PM
But strike it from the rule book and ensure that when UCD or Bohs - or any other club - next have an international call-up and don't really feel like releasing the player, that that's ok too.
PS,
In my view this is the distinct difference, Derry did not refuse to release him.
He played, got injured, contacted the squad management about the injury and said management then released him, for the entire trip. Hence he was free to play for Derry in their next game, which was 8 days later.
mrtndvn
20/10/2010, 2:08 AM
Mr Stu et al
Your very quick to point out that Derry fans aren't quoting this supposive rule that we've broken, unfortunately, aren't so quick to quote the facts on this case.
These are presented to you in the post above ^^
And also backed up by the FAI
"The player (Patrick McEleney) was called into the Republic of Ireland Under-19 squad but contacted management to inform them that he was injured.
"As a result, he was withdrawn from the squad. By the time he had recovered from the injury he was no longer required to fulfil his international duties and so he was eligible to play for Derry City.
"Having established the facts with the assistance of the FAI International and Disciplinary Departments, we are satisfied that there is no action to be taken in relation to this matter."
If you can't understand these points, well that isn't our fault.
No Rules broken, no case to answer.
Shels only put in a complaint cause we battered them at the Brandywell, which was stupid
passerrby
20/10/2010, 1:42 PM
but kev the rule does not say a player maybe deselected if unfit. If the player is selected and cannot/will not fullfil the fixture then he is excluded from any matches his club may play five days of the international game.and i dont think anybody had the right to make that call.
now that would be my interputation of the rule but i think we can all see what we want to see. anyway while i feel derry have broken a rule with the help of the league I would hate to have gained an advantage because of a rule violation rather than on the field of play.
best of luck on the run in, and may the best team win.
pineapple stu
20/10/2010, 2:06 PM
The rule seems to be in two parts -
Any Participant Club refusing to release a player(s) selected for an International or Representative panel under the jurisdiction of the FAI shall not be entitled to play such players(s) until a period of five (5) calendar days has elapsed from the date of such fixture(s).
Any selected player failing to join the panel shall not be permitted to play for his Club for the same period.
If they're to be taken separately, Derry have broken part 2 while claiming that rule 1 exonerates them. McEleaney failed to join the panel, and so can't play for his club for five days after the relevant fixtures.
If the rule is just part 1 on its own, I think it's too open to fudging (such as the current claim that it's ok for Derry to let their player go cos it was agreed by the FAI ). You'll end up with a case where two clubs have players in the squad - one is told he can go home, but the other is told he's not allowed play for his club cos it wasn't agreed with management. You can't have rules which can be overridden because "Ah sure it's grand; we'll cover you".
osarusan
20/10/2010, 2:30 PM
It seems that McEleny called the Irish management and told them he was injured. The management squad then said 'ok, fine, we'll release you from the call-up and carry on as usual.' What I want to know is why they didn't say 'ok, fine, we'll release you from the call-up, but you can't play any game until 5 days after X date.'
Seeing as there is a rule in place which carries the hefty penalty of forfeiting a game, I'm confused as to why the FAI seemingly made no attempt to enforce / investigate.
passerrby
20/10/2010, 2:41 PM
i think this rule was brough in to ensure clubs did not try to stop players fulfilling international obligations in favour of their club needs therefore it should follow that when derry said he was unavailble due to inury (and i have no doubt he was injured) then the league should remind them that rule Number whatever applies.
EalingGreen
20/10/2010, 3:23 PM
I don't know how the Rule was applied (or disregarded) to the letter.
However, from the spirit of the rule, I'd say McEleney/Derry are in the clear. For ultimately the purpose of the rule is to ensure that where a player is required by both club and country, then the latter shall prevail (with a penalty to be imposed on the club, should they try to circumvent the FAI).
However, whilst the FAI may have intitally stated they wanted the player, when they heard the state of his fitness etc, they then decided they didn't. In which case Derry* should be free to use him as they wished.
Remember, the FAI could always have released him with the 5-day proviso, had they wanted.
* - If you think about it, it is actually the club which is being released of its obligation (i.e. to make the player available) by the FAI, as much as the player, since the latter has no guarantee he will actually be selected by his club.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.2 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.