I'd imagine that Shiels was without a club when he received his suspension, hence the letter being sent to his house. Obviously open to correction if anyone knows the proper story.Quote:
Originally Posted by Galway Harps
Printable View
I'd imagine that Shiels was without a club when he received his suspension, hence the letter being sent to his house. Obviously open to correction if anyone knows the proper story.Quote:
Originally Posted by Galway Harps
Dedecuted 3 points for playing him, even though they didn't know he was suspended? WTF!?!?!
:D Love it ;) :cool:Quote:
Originally Posted by BohsPartisan
If it had happened to Ollie I suppose it'd be heading to the European Court.Quote:
Originally Posted by monutdfc
Actually, removing DC's first series games makes more sense than you'd think. You'd be cancelling everyone's second and third round games - i.e. one home and one away - so everyone loses equal games from their original fixture list and ends up with 16 home/15 away or vice versa. By removing all their games, some teams end up with 16 home games and 14 away games, and vice versa.Quote:
Originally Posted by dcfc_1928
That's the biggest load of ****** I've ever heard, and God knows you hear some in this league. If they can prove they didn't know (e.g. postmark on the letter, etc), then they can't be punished. End of story. (Unless Ollie pushes really hard of course...)Quote:
Originally Posted by BohDiddley
Just wondering if we can have one season where there is no point deductions of any sort.
Every season someone loses points it just makes the league look like a joke. LOI clubs sort it out or the attandances will continue to suffer.
i think the decision to remove all results involving dcfc was correct as its the least complicated. even though some clubs might feel harddone its the fairest way and it dosnt effect the table in the slightest as no team gains or loses at the end of the day.
as regards the shamrock rovers point deductions, it is the responsibility of the clubs to check these things when they sign or field a player. thats the way it is in every league. it just seens too convenient for rovers that it got lost in the post.:D
Quote:
Originally Posted by depor
we never said it got lost in the post, we assume it got sent to a defunct CHF who obviously didnt notify shields. it was an additional one game ban so the player and club assumed that the original ban had been seen out as no-one had been contacted in relation to the extra ban. the onus is on the league to notify players of suspensions and they officially havent yet. when rovers recieve notification that he is suspended, he wont play.
The craic with Derry is that the FAI failed to notify Derry with a suspension for Sean Hargan therefore he was allowed to play on, without notification then the fAI have no rite to deduct point from Derry, if they do their decision will be overturned when we take it to court!
League table may need to be explained
Emmet Malone
15/08/2006
On Soccer: In most countries the people who put together league tables for the newspapers need only letters and numbers to complete their weekly chore. As often as not here in Ireland, it seems, the asterisk is central to the process.
As it happens they have been rather neglected so far this season but that may all be about to end for after what should be a hectic day of meetings in Merrion Square tomorrow tables published for the Premier Division of the Eircom League may well be littered with the things.
The desire of Shelbourne to see the points earned against the now-defunct Dublin City restored is the main reason.
It has the potential to result in a table that requires quite a lengthy explanatory footnote while Derry City's apparent error in playing Seán Hargan while he was supposed to be suspended recently may also require a line or two.
We should, of course, be getting used to this sort of thing and as usual the league has to take some responsibility for the mess it finds itself in.
Pointedly, it pretty much beggars belief that nobody anticipated a club would hit the rocks so violently that it would be in no position to comply with the organisation's rather quaint rule 6.4, which states clubs must give two months' notice of intention to resign and may do so only when the season has ended.
The words reflect noble intentions, to be sure, but hardly the reality of a league where at least a couple of clubs flirt with financial ruin each year and even the main administrator at the biggest and most successful outfit is far from a stranger to throwing the kettle on the hob when the Professional Footballers Association of Ireland drops around to sort out the issue of unpaid wages.
Still, those in charge of the league sought to retrospectively sort out the mess left by the untimely demise of Dublin City as best they could. Precedents are few but what few exist all appear to suggest that the club's results should be written out of the record books. And that's what was recommended to a meeting of the league's Board of Control last month.
It was subsequently argued that the board was the wrong committee to deal with the matter and that members associated with clubs standing to benefit from such a decision should have abstained on the matter. It is worth noting, however, that everybody present chose to follow the advice put before them and that those who favoured the action adopted included neutrals and an official of one club (Cork City) that actually lost ground in the title race as a result of the decision.
In any case, the suggestion by an appeals committee that the club's resignation should have been refused seems just a little unrealistic, while a compelling case has yet to be made for allowing a situation whereby the championship is decided in part on the basis of results achieved against a team no longer in existence.
Derry City effectively stand to benefit by three points in respect of their pursuit of Shelbourne if the current position is upheld at tomorrow's Management Committee - which, coincidentally, is the number of points they are most likely to be docked for their actions in the highly contentious Hargan affair.
The problem here centres on whether the club received notification of Hargan's suspension for accumulated bookings ahead of the Bohemians game and whether they subsequently played him against Waterford United after having been made aware, even informally, that he was the subject of a suspension.
Judging by the rules, as amended a couple of years ago, the league looks to be on fairly solid ground here. Notification must be sent either by fax or email, and the latter was apparently used in this instance because the club's fax machine was out of action.
The league can demonstrate that the message was sent and while the club insists it was not received, actually proving it appears to be their only hope of avoiding a penalty, and it is questionable whether that is possible.
City are already threatening legal action over the matter, and the frustration of Derry City manager Stephen Kenny and his players is entirely understandable.
The suspicion is, however, that whatever happens in relation to Dublin City, when the league table is next run on Saturday morning, Derry's name will indeed give the newspapers a reason to roll out the asterisk.
My understanding of the law on this is that if the League have proof of the sent e-mail, it has the same status as a registered letter. The only way Derry could prove they didn't receive it is if theri ISP records prove conclusively that it never came in - which I'd say is unlikely. Accidentally deleted or never opened probably won'r do them any good.
Malone makes a good point about CHF - why should anything in the final league standings be dependent on a team that isn't a part of the league? The final standings of a league table should depend (asterisks aside) on how each team performed agains the other teams in the table - the whole point of a league is to take a certain number of teams and organise them into a ranked, systematical order. CHF are not part of the league, so IMO let everything associated with them be expunged.
If you can't resign from the league should Dublin City then not still be in the table? If they can't fulfil their remaining fixtures all clubs yet to play them should be given a walkover. That's how I see it anyway.
I think that'll be right - if the League can prove the e-mail was sent, then we're fecked.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hecko
For the geeks out there..........
How do you think the League would prove it was sent? Would they require logs from their mail server?
A copy of the original e-mail would not necessarily prove that it was actually sent successfully?
Where is the burden of proof? Is it up to the league to prove it was sent, or Derry to prove it was never received?
Quote:
Originally Posted by dcfc_1928
Anyone can send an email with any date on it, ffs !
Just alter the time and date on your computer's clock and off you go !
Ridiculous....
What's the craic with the broken fax machine story? The Fai would have had to have phoned someone at the club to be informed that the fax machine was not working, out of paper etc. I'm sure in those communications someone would have mentioned the suspension. I reckon people were too busy watching the world cup to send out the notifications, nor was there any press releases at the time relating to the suspension, or even in the build up/previews to the match.
If this story is true this will be easily fixed,as there are plenty of faxes sent to plenty of other people from that very fax machine, therefore through fone records it should be able to show it was working!
I think that to prove that a fax was sent the league/FAI will have to produce a fax confirmation sheet.
In the case of an e-mail, it is possible to flag them to ensure that it has been received. A copy of this may also be needed.
Under the Electronics Communication Act it is necessary to prove that the electronic communication actually entered the machine of the intended recipitent, not just that it was sent.
Records on the FAI Mail Server would prove that the email was sent. There is no reason for them to make this information up as could do the same thing with a fax. How could they FAI prove that Derry had received a fax anyway.
A simple policy of sending a weekly fax/email on a specific day would solve all this. The clubs can check their faxes/emails say every wednesday & notify the FAI if not received.
I agree Pete that there is a sensible answer to this in the future but let's be honest, sensible answers and the FAI/League don't generally go hand in hand.
If Derrry do go to court to challenge a decision it would not be sufficient for the FAI to show through their mail server that the e-mail was sent, they would have to show that the e-mail was received.
Most fax machines print out a sheet after a fax is sent which indicates with an 'ok' or a 'failed' whether the communication was successful. If the FAI/League have this I think it would be accepted that the fax was sent and received.
Anybody know if the rule book specifies by what method notice of a suspension can be communicated?
On the FAX very very simple, phone records and Fax receipt match, then we havent a leg to stand on. Fax was received and printed before a receipt is sent back.Quote:
Originally Posted by pete
with Email it would be impossible to prove on either side, and also as far as i hear the local press are claiming they never recieved the normal press releases either in relation to the suspension, they would ALWAYS request info from the club on who would replace a suspended player, and print this up.
Something very fishy here on the FAI side.
nothing unusual there soQuote:
Originally Posted by garyderry
Two things that I wonder about here- the first being that it may be decided that in such cases ignorance is no defence. Otherwise what would be to stop clubs switching off their fax machine and breaking their email server whenever they know a suspension is coming before a vital game? Obviously Derry had nothing to gain in any of this and I don't doubt they acted in good faith, but if the FAI can prove the communications were sent but problems at Derry's end prevented their receipt then they may end up being punished anyway.
On the other hand there hasn't been a suspension list from the league in quite a while so there's definately something weird going on. I suspect that somebody somewhere is on holidays and whoever's filling in isn't too sure of what they're doing.
Actually the FAI haven't made any comment on anything much since the Dublin City thing. Maybe they've just taken the summer off and put a few transistion year students in to run the show.
Not an adherent of the Let's-blame-Ollie-because-everyone-hates-Shels-and-it-will-give-me-credibility school of posting, but I wonder whether the league was willing to keep this quiet until the thought of Ollie's minions discovering it for themselves and demanding the appropriate sanction forced a change of heart.
That said, I wouldn't entirely rule out an administrative f*ck-up on Derry's part. I remember when we played them at Tolka in April 2004, I got a peek at the official team-sheet which listed a "Ciarán O'Grady" among the substitutes. I mean, how can you misidentify a member of your own playing staff? Conor O'Grady (not listed on the teamsheet and therefore ineligible, just as Ciarán O'Grady was unregistered) was called from the bench in the second half. Less scrupulous parties might have appealed Derry's 2-0 win...
who is we?:confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheridan
Ask Stavros Kenny or Kenneth Brennan, they know all about us.
have the EL made any statement on this matter because the only info i have heard is speculation <has it been referred back to the board of no control or the board of mismanagement.
I was thinking that passerby, are we basing all this on the star's innaccurate article?
Has official contact been made with the clubs?
No doubt the League will circle the wagons tomorrow and seek to cover their arses for the reasons outlined above (ie that normal suspension notification procedures were not operating when the Hargan suspension was incurred).
However, it would seem clear to me that should Derry have the will to take this as far as it can go in the courts, the League don't have the proverbial leg to stand on. Email is virtually irrelevant in a Court of law and registered post was recommended as the proper means of conveying important information following Marney (regardless of rule book changes to the contrary). Add in cross jurisdictional issues and it becomes heresay and conjecture-based.
Normally I would be loathe to seek recourse to the Courts, as it does the League no good, but given the past actions of our main title rivals, I sincerely hope Derry City have retained counsel and are marshalling a robust defence and more critically, are prepared to take it as far as possible. There may even be a few indirect and wider benefits if a torch is shone on the inner machinations and workings of the League.
Let the battle begin.
The Irish Times article didn't mention Shamrock Rovers. Are they still going to be deducted points? In their preview of the Rovers - Athlone match tonight Aertel said they would be deducted them tomorrow...
Quote:
Originally Posted by OneRedArmy
They have retained counsel, and hence the reason that unlike certain parties, there has been no leaks from our side.