Any truth that Avondale objected against Carrigaline after their loss? Carrig played a youth player who was signed only 24 hours before the game.
That should move Avondale back up the table.
Printable View
Any truth that Avondale objected against Carrigaline after their loss? Carrig played a youth player who was signed only 24 hours before the game.
That should move Avondale back up the table.
I heard something about this too, Avondale were awarded the 3 points, is that correct?
If the player was ineligible then the Carrigaline management have only themselves to blame...they took the chance by playing him and were caught out - can't argue with that.
On the other hand it is harsh on the Carrigaline players, unless the lad bagged a hat-trick or something it's unlikely that the result would've been different, but that's only speculation now anyway.
Either way it's funny to see the Dale propping up the table on the MSL site!
Personally I think it's harsh as the player was only a youth player and was signed prior to the game but it didn't get received by the league in Time. I'm not sure abt the facts to be honest but it's sounds a bit messy to me
Originally the league took the 3 points off Carrig but didn't give these to Avondale and then when Avondale objected again they were awarded the 3pts.
It's sounds like sour grapes to me as an Avondale fella said to me they were just beaten by the better team on the day
A fair thing maybe to replay the game?
Are ye sure that carrigaline lost the three points lads on the msl website they have seven played with three wins and four defeats the wins are in no particular order wanderers,everton and avondale,if they have been docked points it would put them right down the league with avondale jumping ahead of them after being awarded the three points,and if the player was ineligible shoudnt that carry a heavier punishment than awarding three points to the opposition?
how the mighty have fallen if this is true! avondale resorting to objections about youth players to get 3 points!! carrig deserved to win this game by all accounts and avondale were beaten by the better team and had no objections on the day!
In my opinion its extremely bad form but Caulfield surely realises his team are in transition, losing so many players from last year is bound to have an efffect.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoda01
I haven't heard of anything like this in a long time. Points should be won on the pitch.
and apparently the guy only came on as a sub with the score already 3-1 to carrig, this is truely bizzare but i do suppose avondale need the points at the minute (something i never thought i would ever say)!Quote:
Originally Posted by razor
Quote:
Originally Posted by gee wizz
I assume that the leauge table has not been amended because the matter is under appeal by Carrigaline.
However, whether the lad came on for 30 seconds or played the entire game and scored ten goals he is still ineligible and I cannot see how Avondale can not be awarded the points.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimhacker
i agree totally with you on this one he wasn't able to play so he shouldnt have been on the bench not alone on the pitch if thats the case none of us need to sign for our clubs,
That is a fair point.
I find it hard to believe though a club would take that chance being 3-1 up. I'm at the understanding that Carrigaline actually thought he was not illegal as he was signed but not within the time frame.
I think a player cannot be signed 48 hours before a game. That's not a fact
Does someone known the exact rules?
Not sure about that one i think the majority of clubs and i could be very wrong here assume once the player has signed and the form is in the post then he is eligible to play,we could do with the msl commitee coming out to verify the rule and also let other clubs know if they plain to dock points off carrigalineQuote:
Originally Posted by Footballer
All weekends senior and junior fixtures are off due to the weather,no football to discuss again this week:(
for years i'v been told once its in da post ur good to go..Quote:
Originally Posted by gee wizz
mayfield utd played rockmount in a friendly this morning mayfield won 1-0 i know rockmount were missing willie b hoey gaz and pat keane but mayfield were all missing wolfie dave quirke and jamie mehan so it was a good result for mayfield,mayfield were also the better team over the 90 mintues
Good work out this morning, Mayfield better overall, Mount had a couple of goal mouth scrambles that on another day would have went in. Alan o Connor also missing, but good work out indeed.
nice to keep ticking over if only we all had the set up mayfield have,wanderers game against hall on douglas's insistence was still going ahead on saturday until it started to rain about 12,they were mad to play as they wanted to keep in touch with rockmount,i think they may have been counting there chickens before they hatched though.:D
isn't alan o connor always missing i heard he shows up when he feels like it
Quote:
Originally Posted by mayfield utd
Depends who your hearing it off I suppose. You can take any player missing a game as genuine or not, be it a hamstring tweak or work committments they use. He missed a bit of the early season games, but seeing as we didn't play a league game til almost December there was no issue really - obviously I'm nothing to do with the club in the slightest so that's only my personal take on it. Players like him don't come along too often at this level so a bit of give and take goes down well.
Lads
What division are Fermoy in? and how are they doing this season?
Are they strong?
Quote:
Originally Posted by abbeyvale
Senior team in div 1 of the senior league. Played 9, 9 points gained. Doesn't look good really. Are your side playing them or just out of interest?
They have some very pacy forwards, but can't supply them in any way at all. Dogged, but lacking basic tactical nous would sum them up.