Awarding clubs league points.

**Dodge** · 20/10/2008, 2:19 PM

Wasn't sure on FAI thing but the game was 100% replayed

**Longfordian** · 20/10/2008, 2:24 PM

Now that I think of it wasn't Ollie looking for Shels to be given the three points?. I'll take your word for it on the replay, I genuinely can't recall it.

**holidaysong** · 20/10/2008, 2:27 PM

Originally Posted by Dodge

Wasn't sure on FAI thing but the game was 100% replayed

Originally Posted by Longfordian

Now that I think of it wasn't Ollie looking for Shels to be given the three points?. I'll take your word for it on the replay, I genuinely can't recall it.

I'm sure there wasn't a replay. If Shels had been allowed a replay then they would have had to allow us one against Shamrock Rovers.

EDIT: Dodge, you're 100% wrong - there was no replay!

**Dodge** · 20/10/2008, 2:34 PM

Just asked a couple of Bohs mates and they say the replay never happened. Ollie demanded ti alright but it was thrown out

Apologies (and I'd have lost huge money on that...)

**higgins** · 20/10/2008, 3:55 PM

Ollie was happy for the game to go to a replay as we had a chance of getting the 3 points had it been replayed. This was never a runner... The FAI made a lot of decisions that year that went against Shels, that was just one of them.

No replay and no 3 points awarded to Shels.

I 100% agree a replay should not have taken place.

**Dodge** · 20/10/2008, 4:04 PM

Originally Posted by higgins

Ollie was happy for the game to go to a replay as we had a chance of getting the 3 points had it been replayed. This was never a runner... The FAI made a lot of decisions that year that went against Shels, that was just one of them.

That wasn't a decision that went against Shels. It was just a decision based on the rules. And as well know "Rules are rules"...

**higgins** · 20/10/2008, 4:13 PM

Originally Posted by Dodge

That wasn't a decision that went against Shels. It was just a decision based on the rules. And as well know "Rules are rules"...

The decision did go against Shels as Shels were punished when a player that shouldn't have been playing played and scored if I remember correctly.

The decision not to award the replay was correct in my opinion.

However you're wrong again Dodge...
The rule allowed the 3 points to be awarded, allowed a replay to take place and allowed Bohemians to be docked points.

The decision could have gone either way. As it happened it went against Shels i.e we were punished for Bohs messing up/knowingly playing suspended players.

**stann** · 20/10/2008, 4:36 PM

Originally Posted by Battery Rover

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

Actually, it seems now that there aren't.
Thanks to Bluewater for digging this out on btid. This is rule 86 from the new FAI rulebook, effective from July 11th 2008, and it's pretty well spelled out.

RULE 86. INELIGIBILITY
1. If a player takes part in an official match despite being ineligible, his team shall be sanctioned by forfeiting the match and paying a fine.
2. If a player takes part in a friendly match despite being ineligible, his team shall be sanctioned by forfeiting the match and paying a fine.
3. Unregistered Players and Suspended Players are deemed to be ineligible

**pineapple stu** · 20/10/2008, 4:37 PM

Forfeit a friendly?!

How are you not eligible for a friendly anyway?

**Battery Rover** · 20/10/2008, 4:45 PM

Originally Posted by pineapple stu

How are you not eligible for a friendly anyway?

If you are with a different club and have not received written permission from that club for the player to take part. We have often used friendlies as trials for players

**holidaysong** · 20/10/2008, 6:17 PM

Originally Posted by stann

RULE 86. INELIGIBILITY
1. If a player takes part in an official match despite being ineligible, his team shall be sanctioned by forfeiting the match and paying a fine.
2. If a player takes part in a friendly match despite being ineligible, his team shall be sanctioned by forfeiting the match and paying a fine.
3. Unregistered Players and Suspended Players are deemed to be ineligible

These rules would appear to be different then to the rules in place in 2006 (pre FAI takeover), whereby offending clubs were deducted three points but the result stood.

If Athlone have played an ineligible player, then going by these rules Waterford would be entitled to the 3-0 forfeit victory.

Is is a suspended player that Athlone are supposed to have fielded?

**Duffman** · 20/10/2008, 8:35 PM

Are these the rules that all the clubs signed up to pre season? There seems to be a date of the middle of the season on that pdf file

**The Lilywhites** · 20/10/2008, 8:47 PM

Decision confirmed. Waterford given the points. Up to 60 now, two behind Shels and Dundalk.

**Duffman** · 20/10/2008, 9:13 PM

Originally Posted by The Lilywhites

Decision confirmed. Waterford given the points. Up to 60 now, two behind Shels and Dundalk.

Confirmed where?

**The Lilywhites** · 20/10/2008, 9:16 PM

Originally Posted by Duffman

Confirmed where?

By the FAI. No link, yet.

**Battery Rover** · 20/10/2008, 10:09 PM

Originally Posted by The Lilywhites

By the FAI. No link, yet.

Cant be confirmed yet by the FAI as clubs would have to be informed first and I have received nothing as of 11pm when last I checked the fax machine

**The Lilywhites** · 20/10/2008, 10:18 PM

Well it is confirmed. The ineligible player is Robbie Benson(?).

**stann** · 20/10/2008, 11:52 PM

Originally Posted by Battery Rover

Cant be confirmed yet by the FAI as clubs would have to be informed first and I have received nothing as of 11pm when last I checked the fax machine

Originally Posted by The Lilywhites

Well it is confirmed. The ineligible player is Robbie Benson(?).

I haven't got anything yet either, but it sounds as if it is official. Just wondering where you heard is all.
Robbie Benson, if it is he, was making his debut for Athlone against us according to a journalist down for the game, so it's to be assumed that there was something wrong with his registration, again, if it is he, rather than a suspension issue. I won't enrage Dundalk fans further by posting how long he played for!