A fairly bizarre and unprecedented decision was taken recently which is likely to lead to season-ruining trouble in the future, yet it has gone fairly unnoticed with little comment.
In the dispute between Wexford and Limerick, Wexford were awarded a 3-0 win and with that came the three points. The awarding of the game to Wexford didn't bother anybody, as neither club are in the running to win the league. I doubt if even Limerick are too put out by the decision. However this is something that hasn't happened before and the decision has huge potential for a massive row in the seasons to come as it sets a precedent.
When Shamrock Rovers player an ineligible player a few seasons back, Rovers were docked points, but the opponents (Dundalk) were not awarded points and rightly so. In the Paul Marney affair, St. Pats were docked points but points were not awarded to their opponents. There is good reason for this as awarding points in a league competition is disadvantaging clubs that were not involved in the games.
The Wexford decision is now there and it will be used if a club with a chance of winning a title find themselves playing a club with an ineligible player. The fall out from that will be considerable with massive negative publicity for the league. UEFA award 3-0 wins all the time for disciplinary reasons. But that's in the knock-out stages of their competitions. They won't do it in the league stages.
There is a rumour going around that Waterford will be awarded 3 points (2 additional) for a league game against Athlone because Athlone allegedly played an ineligible player. If that is the case, then that should be totally unacceptable to Shels, Dundalk and Sporting Fingal.
but the wexford thing isnt got to do with an ineligible player. The other team refused to play.
in that situation the only sensible thing is to award Wexford the win, they werent given a chance to play the game for the points.
The other situations are completely different. In the Waterford situation Athlone should be docked but Waterford should get nothing going on precedent
Well Micls, I hope that is the case.
See the last line of this match report.
http://www.waterford-united.ie/nextp...t_from=&ucat=1&
Other incidents were under the old system not the new shiney fai one
FAI one or FIFA one? The IFA have also changed to similar rules in recent seasons, following the adoption of the FIFA Disciplinary Code.Originally Posted by Tis-smeee
Yeah we genuinely don't care. We're obviously better than those minnows and no one can catch us for the coveted 5th place position in the First Division, so what harm?
The FAI had nothing to do with league rules under all those old examples
the FAI only took over running the league from the clubs themselves last year
before it was a joke, clubs could vote in the way that suited there club in
each case. At least now the FAI are independent (mostly)
LOL if you think the running of the league is any different to years ago. The FAI have always been involved, and the clubs still have too much say.
The only real difference is the club contract and licensing
Oh and Pats got the points back for Marney
54,321 sold - wws will never die - ***
---
New blog if anyone's interested - http://loihistory.wordpress.com/
LOI section on balls.ie - http://balls.ie/league-of-ireland/
That's not to help us win the league - it's just to keep up the historical precedence of Waterford being the beneficiaries if and when Premier clubs go bust and get relegated.
Foot.ie's entire existence is predicated on the average idiot's inability to ignore other idiots
Is there any official line in relation to the Waterford Athlone debacle. I don't know how Waterford could argue that they'd win the game if that player wasn't playing.
More than likely Mr Delaney helping out his home town club and wanting to screw us over again
Long Live King Kenny
Unless some ludicrous number of points were to be awarded I don't see how it would really make a difference. In the eyes of the League, Limerick went to Wexford, lost 3-0 and Wexford won the three points. How does that make a difference. Indeed, it is precisely the same if a team field an ineligible player. In the eyes of the league, they walked onto the pitch with 10 men and lost. There are rules and they must be followed. I don't see how it causes any great complications.
We tend to believe that words enable thought. But words can also substitute for thought.
- Richard A. Posner
That line was taken from what was said on our local radio on the night of the game, and reported here. It doesn't add anything else to the debate over what has already been posted on here again and again. Don't be citing it as if it's some further proof of something that may not yet happen.
Waterford haven't argued anything, the first they heard about it is when they were told they'd be getting the points, so let's nip that in the bud straightaway. Whether they will get the points or not is to be clarified this week, we're told. The official line is it apparently is in the rules, but that it's a discretionary thing. I don't think they will in the end, but you'll just have to wait and see.
I can only assume the last sentence is a poor attempt at humour.for you if you actually believe that.
Last edited by stann; 20/10/2008 at 12:33 PM.
more bass
You can't compare the ineligible player situation with the Wexfordgate situation.
The extratime.ie article shows that the precedent is there that the club fielding the ineligible player should get a three points deduction but that the result should stand (like what happened between ourselves and Shamrock Rovers in the 2006 season).
The Wexford/Limerick situation is different though, as their was no result as the match didn't take place, the FAI had to award the points to someone.
If it comes to light that Athlone did indeed play an ineligible player, I'd expect them to be deducted three points but for the 0-0 result to stand. In my opinion, Dundalk, Shelbourne and Fingal would be more than justified in challenging a decision whereby Waterford were awarded points.. However, I think that the FAI are right in awarding Wexford the three points, as that match against Limerick didn't take place, it's impossible to allow a result to stand.
I saw an official team sheet this season that had the name of a player who wasn't even part of their squad and I believe the fine was only €100. He didn't play but a player not even on the team sheet did.
I know thats off topic as it has nothing to do with what happened in Waterford but there are loads of interprations of the rule book
The last time an ineligible player palyed in the premier division (Jason McGuinness for Bohs v Shels), Bohs were deducted 3 points and the match was replayed
And that was part of the new FAI league, wasn't it?
54,321 sold - wws will never die - ***
---
New blog if anyone's interested - http://loihistory.wordpress.com/
LOI section on balls.ie - http://balls.ie/league-of-ireland/
Totally forgot about that!
Larry Be Wyse
www.acsportsimages.com
I don't think that match was replayed Dodge. Ollie was looking for a replay alright, don't think he got one though.
Upwards to the vanguard where the pressure is too high.
Nope, that was the same season as Rovers played an ineligible player against us (the last season before the FAI took over) and the Bohs-Shels match was not replayed.
And it was 2006, which was before the new super duper league. (Though obviously, I agree that it's the same thing under a different name)
And the replay was in direct contravention of a court case taken by Kilkenny about ten years ago, when their replay against Dundalk was ruled void or something (can't remember the exact details, but I'm pretty sure Ollie managed to get the law changed to suit him).
Posting Permissions
Quote
Bookmarks