Printable View
As Battery Rover posted above, that's not the reason. Lads, posting these 'I heard's isn't very helpful at this point. Was told what the problem was, and I imagine Battery Rover knows too, but best not post it here until the decision is made one way or the other.Quote:
Originally Posted by blue til i die
Quote:
Originally Posted by stann
Yep know the story but not going to post it on a forum to give people fuel to attack. Totally agree with Stann.
why? shur gwan tell usQuote:
Originally Posted by stann
I'm surprised this hasn't come up. Nor indeed was it raised in 2006, even though by that stage, then Dundalk follower Daniel McDonnell had a national media gig. My memories pretty hazy but heres how I recall it.Quote:
Originally Posted by pineapple stu
Basically what happened in the 1999/00 season was as follows. Kilkenny City manager Pat Byrne signed Fran Carter in advance of a game with Limerick. He wanted to get him registered in time, but either Fran was in Galway or Pat was away I'm not sure which, so there was a spot of forgery done on the player registration form. Fran lined out in the game, and City won. It subsequently came to light about the forgery, and Kilkenny forfeited the 3 points, though no award was made to Limerick. Kilkenny took the matter to appeal. Which never really would have been of consequence were it not for their spectacular close to the season under temporary boss Paul Power (Pat having been the victim of Eddie Foley red cards on numerous occasions culminating in an obscenely lengthy ban) combined with a typical end of season collapse from Dundalk under Terry Eviston, seeing the 2 sides fighting it out for the 3rd place playoff spot.
After much deliberation in the appeal rooms, it was decided that the matter should be decided by arbitration. Showing their usual foresight the League saw fit to appoint Mooncoin native and friend of City, Milo Corcoran to this role. He ruled that the Limerick game should be replayed, which it was on the Thursday preceding the final round of fixtures. City made the playoffs with Waterford.
At some stage in the process Dundalk went to the High Court to seek an injunction against the fixture, but they were unsuccessful.
The Paul Shiels decision in 2006 was quite ludicrous, as he carried a suspension from Dublin City to Rovers, even though the League had nullified Dublin City's results.
There was NO REPLAY of the Bohs-Shels fixture in 2006. Ollie argued his case on that, and I even recall reading an interview with him in the Sunday Times right after Shels won the league where he said he believed he was right in principle, and that he would pursue the case further. Sadly he suffered his stroke not long after.
The problem which we have with the Waterford-Athlone fixture is that it was a draw, rather than an Athlone win, so there is no easy solution to dock Athlone the points. I don't believe Waterford should automatically get the 3 points, as they did not earn them. However unless the rules have been changed the FAI are well within their remit to award those points. With Dundalk and Shels to come at home, I would have a strong fancy for Waterford to finish top on the back of this boost. Having said that, the whole licensing/wage cap/money issues/ground suitability situation will make the promotion/relegation battle about so much more than league placings.
Still nothing confirmed then? Why the wait?
Nice post Rob, but if you take a look at the thread again, I commend post 28 to your attention. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob_the_cat
The rules have changed, it's been posted and mentioned many times above. Previous examples are irrelevant, because they were under the old rules. The new rule and the sanctions are spelled out in crystal clear fashion.
Christ, man, patience! :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Blue-Army
It's still only Wednesday morning. The Disciplinary Committee always meets on Wednesday evenings. That's the answer to both your questions. ;)
Of course you can, particularly when you signed up to the rules!Quote:
Originally Posted by SMorgan
What a ridiculous statement.Quote:
Originally Posted by SMorgan
Would that be Waterford Crystal?! ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by stann
Another case that hasn't been mentioned was the Noel Hunt affair when he was on loan to Waterford from Rovers he then went back to Rovers for one match to play a league cup tie before returning to Waterford and played against Dublin City.
Ronan Seery then claimed that 'I can't believe it's not Home Farm' should have been awarded the 3 points for the game which would have put them in a playoff position ahead of Harps.
Being the generous man that he was he even offered Harps a playoff for the playoff spot.
It was thrown out anyway but as has been mentioned the rules have since changed and it looks like Waterford could be 2 points closer to the top tonight.
1) How difficult can it be to check that a player is registered or not? All it takes is a phone call, or a fax, or a phone call to verify a fax was received to check registration papers?
2) Time lag. The game was played on the 3/10 and took until the possibly 17/10 for this info to come out. What happened in those 14 days or why did it take 14 days.
Out of interest, if Waterford had won the game by more than three goals would that result stand or would it be changed to 3-0?
Result would stand I'd say.Quote:
Originally Posted by scej
The original result would have stood. (Rule 126 in this PDF)Quote:
Originally Posted by scej
Quote:
Originally Posted by stann
No outcome from last nights meeting then? Smoke and mirrors :rolleyes:
The suspensions and sanctions issued by the committee should appear here at some point today.. I don't know of any other website that puts them up.
According to btid.net...
It's confirmed in today's Daily Star.
Blues receive a 3-0 win from the FAI's Disciplinary Committee and thus move onto 60 points.
Athlone used 16 year old sub Robbie Benson as a 77th minute replacement for David o' Dowd in the October 3 draw. It later emerged that the Ireland u17 international was not cleared to play for Athlone, although no blame was attached to the teenager for the mistake.
If you wrote your post off the top of your head I'm impressed. That's an awful lot of info about the league for one brain. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob_the_cat
As has been pointed out, the rules have been changed, Athlone effectively cheated and now have to pay for it. There are rules, and contrary to popular belief, they are NOT there to be broken. :rolleyes:
i think the right decision is to give waterford the 3 points even though i can understand the frustration of dundalk and shels supporters.
if an ineligible plater in any way affected the match result the sanction should be forfeiture of the match. 3-0 seems to be the worldwise accepted norm in this case.
i do not in any way want waterford to be promoted as it is a long journey from sligo and a place we never seem to get points from but this judgement is based on logic.
if i was a shels or dundalk fan i would be pointing the finger of blame in the direction of athlone town.
I assume you are familiar with the specifics of this case to make a statement like that?Quote:
Originally Posted by sligored
did athlone field an ineligible player as from what i can see this seems to be the allegation. i know nothing of the specificsQuote:
Originally Posted by Ash
Well without knowing the specifics you shouldnt really be telling Dundalk & Shels fansQuote:
Originally Posted by sligored
where the should be pointing blame!
This case is all based around specifics and based on those circumstances, I would say
No, we didnt field an ineligible player.
I cant go into more detail as the Clubs have not been officially notified of a decision yet