Darthter 542 Posted August 3, 2017 Share Posted August 3, 2017 According to recent media reports, it would appear that Leigh Griffiths missed the 1st leg against Rosenborg through injury, rather than suspension for his behaviour against Linfield. Now, a suspension is supposed to be a punishment, but I would suggest if the player is truly injured for the period of the suspension....is it REALLY a punishment?? If the player actually is injured, they wouldn't play in the matches anyway, therefore the team haven't lost anything. In cases like this, should the suspension be carried over until the next game that the player is fit to play??? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,720 Posted August 3, 2017 Share Posted August 3, 2017 Reading between the lines of what the Yahoos actually said, it seems he was injured after the first leg and was now back after (the suspension and) the injury, after all, they played in Sunderland at the weekend. Methinks the ruling as such says that the suspension refers to the first game the player is eligible for and does not go into any further detail. Does it cover times when he is injured or only games when he is actually fully fit? Would have to check precedents. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darthter 542 Posted August 3, 2017 Author Share Posted August 3, 2017 Reading between the lines of what the Yahoos actually said, it seems he was injured after the first leg and was now back after (the suspension and) the injury, after all, they played in Sunderland at the weekend. Methinks the ruling as such says that the suspension refers to the first game the player is eligible for and does not go into any further detail. Does it cover times when he is injured or only games when he is actually fully fit? Would have to check precedents. I think when they refer to eligibility, it refers to player registration, suspensions etc ie. can the player "legally" play in the match. A player being injured does not effect his eligibility to play. My point is that is a player in genuinely injured, they would not play in that match anyway, therefore the Team does not suffer any penalty as a result. My thinking was spurred by the Griffiths thing, but it really is a lot more general. If we take Griffith as an example. If he picked up the injury during the Linfield game, suspension or not, he would have been out of the 1st leg, and Ceptic would have known that straight after the game before any UEFA reports had even been submitted. UEFA then had him a one match suspension, which applies while he's injured. My thinking is that the suspension should have been served once he was fit enough to play ie the 2nd leg. While I have mentioned Griffith above, this in no means applies only to him/them. I'm sure many teams over the years have preemptively announced a player injury prior to them receiving a suspension - means the team can report (genuinely) that the player is out through injury rather than suspension. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.