Bloody Poles

[BrahimHemdani 1]

UEFA could have altered their punishment to a fine, allowing Legia to stay in the tournament, or it could have offered a replay as a solution and if one club had rejected what would generally have been seen as a fair offer, Legia would have been dismissed - and Celtic outed.

 

No they couldn't, as I and others have pointed out several times; the rule is mandatory where a suspended player plays in a match, the match is forfeit. End of....

 

However, I did agree with you earlier to the extent that it may make UEFA sit up and change the rule to allow flexibility in future as with an ineligible player.

 

Lastly, just to reiterate, presumably all or 99% of other teams in the competition knew the Rules and abided by them.

Edited August 15, 2014 by BrahimHemdani

[BrahimHemdani 1]

Looks like CAS could have a speedy appeal on Monday for this.

 

And it will take them at least 5 mins to throw the case out.

[Rangersitis 0]

Remember this?

 

 

 

DAFC APPEAL UPHELD

 

Thursday, 21st Jan 2010

 

SFA have allowed Dunfermline Athletic to be reinstated. A replay will be played at Stenhousemuir.

 

Breaking News at 17.28*

The SFA have allowed Dunfermline Athletic to be reinstated to the Active Nations Scottish Cup - as opposed to expulsion announced on Thursday 14th January.**The SFA have ordered a replay at Stenhousemuir and Dunfermline will have to pay out a £21,000 fine and forfeit*the award for this round.

 

Statement from SFA

The SFA's Appeals Board has upheld, in part, the appeal by Dunfermline Athletic Football Club in regard to their suspension from the Active Nation Scottish Cup.

 

After appearing in front of the independent three-man panel, Dunfermline Athletic will now replay their fourth-round tie against Stenhousemuir, at Ochilview, at a date to be confirmed.

 

They have been fined £20,000 for fielding a suspended player, Calum Woods, in the original tie against Stenhousemuir. In addition, they have also been fined £1000 for submitting an inaccurate team line and their appearance fee from the fourth-round tie has also been forfeited.

 

Gordon Smith, chief executive of the Scottish FA, commented: "We are surprised at the outcome after what the Emergency Committee considered a number of serious infringements of the cup competition rules.

 

"None the less, we respect the decision of the Appeals Board and hope that the situation involving Dunfermline Athletic Football Club, and the sanctions imposed on them tonight, will ensure all participating clubs are mindful of the cup competition rules in future."

 

 

 

As I recall, most people were happy to see Dunfermline reinstated. Commonsense had won the day. A more fitting punishment had been awarded.

 

I don't remember it. What was the specific regulation that they broke and what was the punishment stipulated for the offence?

 

Can we get back to the current issue that you completely sidestepped?

[Hildy 0]

I don't remember it. What was the specific regulation that they broke and what was the punishment stipulated for the offence?

 

Can we get back to the current issue that you completely sidestepped?

Read it and you'll see why they were in trouble. This was as recently as 2010.

 

See my reply earlier about what UEFA should have done. This isn't a parliament - it is an organisation that challenges its own rulings when it feels inclined to do so. Basically, it is a law unto itself.

 

It has given a ruling that is fairly widely perceived to be unjust. If it wanted to, it could change it. I don't expect it to, but if it did, Celtic and others could jump up and down for a while, but in the end they'd have to grit their teeth and accept it after all avenues of complaint had been exhausted.

[Rangersitis 0]

Read it and you'll see why they were in trouble. This was as recently as 2010.

 

See my reply earlier about what UEFA should have done. This isn't a parliament - it is an organisation that challenges its own rulings when it feels inclined to do so. Basically, it is a law unto itself.

 

It has given a ruling that is fairly widely perceived to be unjust. If it wanted to, it could change it. I don't expect it to, but if it did, Celtic and others could jump up and down for a while, but in the end they'd have to grit their teeth and accept it after all avenues of complaint had been exhausted.

 

Celtic would, quite rightly, have appealed any decision which ignored rules which have no leeway written into them, and they would have won it.

 

You have still to explain why Legia didn't feel the need to challenge this rule prior to signing up to play under the auspices of UEFA and their rules.

 

There is little point in discussing apples and oranges, so you will need to publish the relevant ruling in the case of Dunfermline.

[Hildy 0]

Celtic would, quite rightly, have appealed any decision which ignored rules which have no leeway written into them, and they would have won it.

 

You have still to explain why Legia didn't feel the need to challenge this rule prior to signing up to play under the auspices of UEFA and their rules.

 

There is little point in discussing apples and oranges, so you will need to publish the relevant ruling in the case of Dunfermline.

Dunfermline fielded an ineligible player.

 

They were thrown out the competition - and then reinstated.

 

In a civilised environment, every effort is made to ensure that the punishment fits the 'crime'. Dunfermline received some leniency after an appeal and almost all of Scottish football nodded its approval.

 

Legia have been given an extremely harsh sentence for a piece of maladministration. The cost in financial terms and in prestige is potentially colossal. It is a draconian punishment.

 

UEFA can do whatever it wants with little or no comeback, and yet it has chosen to hammer one party for a red tape offence and reward another party's sporting inadequacy.

 

If a member association can reinstate a club for fielding an ineligible player, there is a case to be made for the mother ship organisation to do exactly the same thing.

[Rangersitis 0]

Dunfermline fielded an ineligible player.

 

They were thrown out the competition - and then reinstated.

 

In a civilised environment, every effort is made to ensure that the punishment fits the 'crime'. Dunfermline received some leniency after an appeal and almost all of Scottish football nodded its approval.

 

Legia have been given an extremely harsh sentence for a piece of maladministration. The cost in financial terms and in prestige is potentially colossal. It is a draconian punishment.

 

UEFA can do whatever it wants with little or no comeback, and yet it has chosen to hammer one party for a red tape offence and reward another party's sporting inadequacy.

 

If a member association can reinstate a club for fielding an ineligible player, there is a case to be made for the mother ship organisation to do exactly the same thing.

 

There is no case to be made. Read the regulation, the one that Legia didn't, and then tell me whether they were treated harshly or whether they were treated fairly. Leave aside the emotive pish about 'sporting inadequacy'.

 

Still waiting on you posting the specific charge that Dunfermline faced. Your continued prevarication is leading me to believe that it wasn't the same as Legia faced.

[Rangersitis 0]

Dunfermline's charge sheet:

 

“The breaches of the Cup Competition rules are as follows: Playing a suspended player - Calum Woods, Submitting an inaccurate team line, Altering a named substitute, Not registering two outfield under-21 players.

 

As I said, apples and oranges - and that is without seeing what the rules stipulate as to what a punishment should be.

[Hildy 0]

There is no case to be made. Read the regulation, the one that Legia didn't, and then tell me whether they were treated harshly or whether they were treated fairly. Leave aside the emotive pish about 'sporting inadequacy'.

 

Still waiting on you posting the specific charge that Dunfermline faced. Your continued prevarication is leading me to believe that it wasn't the same as Legia faced.

We have seen how different punishments can be applied when ineligible players are fielded.

 

Ineligible is ineligible but the punishment seems to vary.

 

Some cultures believe that cutting off a man's hand is an appropriate punishment for low level theft. Others recognise that it is an act of inexcusable barbarism.

 

UEFA is wielding its disciplinary axe rashly in this instance and fair minds would like to see it act in a way consistent with its fair play ethos.

 

Others, however, see the issue as being cut and dried and wholly appropriate because it is 'in the rules'. I certainly wouldn't want to belong to this group.

 

Arguing for fairness and leniency is a better place to be than resignation and pushover submission to a flawed - some would say corrupt - organisation's rulebook.

[Rangersitis 0]

We have seen how different punishments can be applied when ineligible players are fielded.

 

Ineligible is ineligible but the punishment seems to vary.

 

Some cultures believe that cutting off a man's hand is an appropriate punishment for low level theft. Others recognise that it is an act of inexcusable barbarism.

 

UEFA is wielding its disciplinary axe rashly in this instance and fair minds would like to see it act in a way consistent with its fair play ethos.

 

Others, however, see the issue as being cut and dried and wholly appropriate because it is 'in the rules'. I certainly wouldn't want to belong to this group.

 

Arguing for fairness and leniency is a better place to be than resignation and pushover submission to a flawed - some would say corrupt - organisation's rulebook.

 

That's correct, different punishments for different, if similar, offences. As you like to go off on crime and punishment tangents, that is like saying culpable homicide should receive the same tariff as premeditated murder.

 

Doesn't fair play mean the same as playing by the rules? Introduce a set of rules, and penalties for breaking them, only to turn round and say "Ahh, just forget about it this time." In what way could that be considered to be consistent?

 

Legia did want to be in that group with all it's rules and regulations - they even signed up to it, however, when it fell foul of those edicts, through nobody's fault but their own, they started to bleat about it being unfair. It wasn't, it was stupidity that hundreds of other clubs manage to avoid year after year.