In fairness Raśl Madrid has made an interesting point quite different to the pages and pages of utter tripe which preceded it !Originally Posted by the 12 th man
Just one last reply to clear things up here.
The rule regarding players being suspended automatically for one match
has been in place for last year and maybe the year before that as well,
any club can tell you this rule.
In fairness Raśl Madrid has made an interesting point quite different to the pages and pages of utter tripe which preceded it !
That's fair enough Side Cutter - not knowing the rules is no defence.
However, from reading back through the posts, it seems that the player in question should have served his suspension in the match immediately prior to the Coonagh v Caherconlish game. Apparently, Coonagh won this game 7-1 v Parkville.
Surely, therefore, it is PARKVILLE who should be awarded the three points from THAT fixture, and the result of the Coonagh v Caherconlish game should stand. In other words, the beneficiaries of Coonagh's error should be the team against whom the player SHOULD have served his suspension. It should be irrelevant to Caherconlish whether an opposing player does or does not observe a suspension in a game not involving their club.
I work in the law myself and, in terms of appeals, precedents and just general fair play, these issues need to be looked at carefully. Coonagh would have excellent grounds for appealing this decision in my view (not that I would generally encourage such an approach in an amateur game)
I see where you are coming from, but parkville never knew of this and did not appeal.
But as he played against caherconlish he was still illegal as he had not served his one match automatic ban and that is why the ldmc adjudicated on those grounds.
Just to clarify this, the FAI rule regarding automatic one match suspension was only adopted into the LDMC rule book at the AGM last summer so this is the first season it applies to local leagues. The LDMC told me so.
Now can we pleeeeeeaaaaaasssssse let this alone nefore the thread is closed and/or someone is banned.
18 times, and that's a fact.
That's obviously how the LDMC must have viewed it alright. Either way, it is a pity. I assume Caherconlish will now go on to win a title that will, to some extent, seem tarnished in the view of some local observers. And then I am sure Coonagh will feel disgusted to miss out on a championship based on a procedural/administrative error. T
hat's why I brought up the Leeds/Stuttgart precedent earlier. I thought that playing a one-off match on neutral ground would be a better solution. It would penalise Coonagh for their mistake in not observing the suspension, and would give Caherconlish another bite of the cherry in terms of wiping out a 4-1 loss. Equally, if Caherconlish came through such a fixture, who could honestly say they weren't true champions?
At amateur level, it's not about money, its about glory, so a tarnished championship just cheapens both sides' efforts since last August, which is a pity, because they are obviously both good sides for that level of play ...
Okay Larry, case closed. Just wanted to make my own suggestion from reading all of your posts ...
Division 4A
Cappamore 5 Shelbourne B 1
Division 4B
St Patricks C 1 Shelbourne C 3
Any other results from the lower divisions?
Div. 3b herbertstown b 1 coonagh b(the real champs) 0
game over.
Congatulations Caherconlish. You are deserving champions. Now for the double i suppose.
That Herbertstown defence is tighter than the Kingofkilteely when it comes to buying a round on the train. Had majority of possession for most of the game but created only 1 chance all game and the king himself missed it.
18 times, and that's a fact.
I blame the bootsThat Herbertstown defence is tighter than the Kingofkilteely when it comes to buying a round on the train. Had majority of possession for most of the game but created only 1 chance all game and the king himself missed it.
The yellow boots looked better than his green/white head yesterday. Very sick puppy.I blame the boots
18 times, and that's a fact.
For shame, imagine someone going out the night before a match
I noticed you were up late too on Saturday night Lar
hi hamster,think you have done a pretty poor job at disguising your obvious coonagh connections......technicality...bad sportsmanship....the greatest discipline of all competition is to adhere to the rules,if you dont you get punished.the constant references by you and others on this site to the ....real champs....has been very disrespectful to all the other teams in this particuliar division,the town gave their answer to that on sun.a league is a marathon not a sprint.
hi,
Got St Pats this Saturday night at St Pats,
i have read earlier post with Cup Competitions and there is a rule that if the game is cancelled due to unplayable pitch team loses home advantage does that apply to Divisional Cup games as well
Just Curious
Hi Jock,
I think it may be if the game is cancelled twice. Teams get 2 chances to host the game and after that it iss switched. That was the case anyway unless it has been changed.
Cant imagine any pitches being unplayable with this weather.
18 times, and that's a fact.
Played St Pats last Sunday in the league. It is impossible to play any decent football on their pitch. Our own two pitches are not exactly Wembley but at least both goals are at the same altitude.
i agree with u shels they should have to level up that pitch its a disgrace.it is impossible to play football on
same altitude thats a classic
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks