Printable View
Looks like this is going to go on on on.why don't the replay go ahead and let the best team win.are st michaels afraid of pike rovers.they shouldn't be haven't they the two best centre halves in the country according to Gerry Smyth .??????????????????Quote:
Originally Posted by hooper74
Typical response from yourself...my post was not a dig at any club.no point in trying to explain my point to you, as you would not understand it. People wonder why people dislike Pike rvs, or should i say some of their so called supporters......go back to carrying water it is about your level of intelligence..
Lads,
Can some one correct me if I'm wrong, but have Killmallock, Regional, Pike and Fairview been involved in appeals in this years FAI Junior Cup?? An awful lot of appealing going on in Limerick, still bet those who sell aftersun lotion are happy!!!
first impressions are very strange decision , thought Michaels had clout ???. surely any club found to be illegal are removed from comp.Quote:
Originally Posted by hooper74
(will all munster cup and league games be replayed. ) this could cause more problems than it solves. Next move from St. Mls will be interesting
Once again you are in error.. would have been proud to have founded them but i only came along later,played with them for 2 seasons...great bunch of lads and a great club...the cecil bar...memories....
FYI: unlike your club where 2 people own it and pay the bills,I am only a member of Janesboro, who tries to provide facilities for the playing and improvement of the game.....
in our club their are no Mr I own the Club... all of our members do...
heard st michaels are appealling to the senior council, anyone know when will that be heard,
Kilmallock and regional yes.pike and view.no.kilmallock and boro called off because of frozen pitch.don't think boro were awarded the game.think the problem was kilmallock wouldn't travel into boro.leather might verify this.regional objected to a player who wasn't signed with park rangers.there was objection there.Quote:
Originally Posted by Longshanks
Boro v killmallock was a farce down to bad communication from the powers that be.... nothing to do with objections by either club....once more our friends in carey's road were involved...
What's new with them.but there only there because clubs keep electing them.Quote:
Originally Posted by leather
Its not often that we agree but well said....
reason being coz clonmel played a suspended player aswellQuote:
Originally Posted by Tipp Top
How was alan coady illegal?Quote:
Originally Posted by the only 1
were Pike found guilty on all 6 objections or just on 1?
To me it comes accross st michaels are afraid to play pike rovers, im not the biggest pike fan but why are teams afraid ofpike, fai have ordered a replay why would a club that were well beaten at home not redeem themselves by playing a match or do they just want the fai to hand the cup over, its has to be embarrassing for the st michaels players im sure they would want to play the match again, is barry ryan till involved with st micheals or is he just a supporter.
Did the LDMC take the blame?Quote:
Originally Posted by redcardrory
yeah gerry smyth !!!!! would you trust him ?Quote:
Originally Posted by Poolman
i believe they werent found guilty but cant be sure i suppose replay is the fairest, see ye in the final.
Taken from the FAI WebsiteQuote:
FAI Junior Council Protest Committee DecisionTuesday, 23 March 2010 16:01 PDF | Print | E-mail The Protest Committee of the FAI Junior Council heard a protest by St. Michael's in relation to their FAI Umbro Junior Cup Quarter-Final tie against Pike Rovers on March 14.
Having heard the protest on Monday, March 22, in FAI Headquarters and having considered all the evidence presented by both parties, the Protest Committee have decided in the best interest of Fair Play, and for the common good of the Cup Competition and Football, that the original game be declared null and void and the game re-fixed for Cooke Park on a date to be decided.
This decision as per rule can be appealed to the Senior Body.
It appears that Pike can appeal the decision to replay also.
Closed until I get time to sort it out.
If you want to post on this thread keep it civil or don't bother to post,show a bit of cop-on if you want this thread to survive.
[QUOTE=centre mid;1337765]FAI Junior Council Protest Committee DecisionTuesday, 23 March 2010 16:01 PDF | Print | E-mail The Protest Committee of the FAI Junior Council heard a protest by St. Michael's in relation to their FAI Umbro Junior Cup Quarter-Final tie against Pike Rovers on March 14.
Having heard the protest on Monday, March 22, in FAI Headquarters and having considered all the evidence presented by both parties, the Protest Committee have decided in the best interest of Fair Play, and for the common good of the Cup Competition and Football, that the original game be declared null and void and the game re-fixed for Cooke Park on a date to be decided.
This decision as per rule can be appealed to the Senior Body. QUOTE]
that is the fai alright. If pike did nothing wrong then they should be through. if they did wrong they should be out. This is not fair on Pike either and it's not a matter of scared to play etc etc
I think this shows the fai as a crowd of cowboys (as we know) with the statement 'the Protest Committee have decided in the best interest of Fair Play, and for the common good of the Cup Competition and Football' , where was this statement when Park were thrown out in an earlier round when the fai said 'we can see ye did nothing wrong ', maybe this ruling is just for the big boys.........
Goals ye played a fella who wasn't even signed."Sergio ".?????that's what ye had on the card.now come on.
ye had a players nickname on the card according to member of junior council.Quote:
Originally Posted by serpico
if you check back what happened was his forms were sent to the ldmc, (as normal with ,you get nothing back so you just wait the time for this to go through). This happened in late september. We did not play him till mid october (to allow his registration to go through) , put his name on the card and everything for our games. Then when we play regional in Nov they were made aware of a possible route of objection due to just seeing Sergio on the card (a newspaper reporter told them). Upon investigation it came out the ldmc never recieved the documents for him and paul carr. Why wait 2 weeks to play him? Why not put a different name on the card? we were trying to hide nothing and due to the registraton process not being right/transparent it became apparent that he was not signed. The fai recognised this and said that they could see we did not try to hide him or do anythign wrong, but rules are rules and we were kicked out. No talk of replay etc etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by serpico
We took it on the chin then, but now that the fai look at the above objection with the view of 'interest of Fair Play, and for the common good of the Cup Competition and Football' it sickens me.....
Don't get me wrong I am not having a go at Pike but those idiots in HQ supposly running our sport. How can it be that if rules are broken it is one rule for one and one for another....
Goals an extraction from today's paper."although pike rovers were required to clarify the registration status of one of their players it should be noted that the distirict league side were not found guilty of any wrongdoing and emerged with the reputation of the club intact."I think that says it all.
what paperQuote:
Originally Posted by serpico
Limerick leader.Quote:
Originally Posted by faces
Wonder what it says in the 'Tipp Tribune' or equivalent 'local' paper, surely the same impartial reporting of a fudge, No???Quote:
Originally Posted by serpico
you are not listening to me......Quote:
Originally Posted by serpico
Pike should be through if they did nothing worng. say michaels beat them in the replay, why would that be fair? The result should stand as they were found of no wrong doing...
If that was in a local Tipp paper it would carry a lot more weightQuote:
Originally Posted by Goals4fun
Where will the match be replayed???Quote:
Originally Posted by are you serious
cooke park apparently.Quote:
Originally Posted by gaidin
this ruling is going too open some can of worms in the future....Quote:
Originally Posted by are you serious
Lads, I believe St Michaels have gone to the Fai Senior Council to try and get the Junior Council decision overturned and have Pike diqualified.Quote:
Originally Posted by leather
lads i dont think st micheals want a replay because they dont belive they can beat pike fact that coming from a micheals manQuote:
Originally Posted by Quietman
cant see the fai senior council overuling junior can you?..if junior council deemed they did nothing wrong st.michaels are getting replay for nothing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Quietman
That would be correct from what i hear also.. It is really being dragged out now isn't it...Quote:
Originally Posted by Quietman
as it seems from posters here st.micheals have appealed to the senior council,which would make sense given they had objected to pike..are now back in the competition,only to be now playing the club they objected to ,it should be remembered they didn,t object to the ldmc who might have made a mistake allegedly.making out they would be afraid of a replay is rather petty.the big question is are pike or why have,n pike contested this replay ruling,if they have,n done anything wrong its seems crazy they would accept this decision,why should they have to replay a game they ,in the end ,won well and have they got santion to play the alleged illegal player,players in this match if not why not...in the interests of fair play surely they should be as it appears they had,nt ...unwillingly....done anything wrong.bottom line here is the fai have messed up and now passed the baton on to the senior council.there is no way pike should accept this.
There can be only two possible outcomes now.......1: The Fai Senior Council uphold the decision of the Junior Council and a reply is ordered, or 2: The Senior Council overturn the decision of the Junior Council and disqualify Pike from the competition thus leaving an all Tipp South semi between St. Michaels and Clonmel Town. Personally I can only see the latter decision coming out of this, which is a real pity IMO but having said that, Pike are guilty and it would seem like the fairest outcome.........Quote:
Originally Posted by da bishop
the whole thing is a shambles and the cup has been devalued as a result.if rules have been broken those who broke them should be out.if they have not broke them the objection should have been thrown out,the FAI knew no matter who they ruled for there would be an appeal to the higher body so they took the easy option.