Cowden Cowboy Posted April 15, 2019 Share Posted April 15, 2019 8 minutes ago, HibeeJibee said: For next season it needs codified in the rules what the punishment should be - whether that be 3pts deduction or 3-0 awards. You can't have each panel potentially deciding on 3pt deduction, replay, "keep it alive" deduction (e.g. Hearts = 2pts), or 3-0 awards, willy-nilly. Quite happy if normal punishment was set at 3-0 awards and 3 point deduction - unless mitigating circumstances. No problem with different approach for Betfred which is a cup competition and only has teams playing 4 matches in a section not 36 games -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clydeontheup Posted April 15, 2019 Share Posted April 15, 2019 1 minute ago, Cowden Cowboy said: Quite happy if normal punishment was set at 3-0 awards and 3 point deduction - unless mitigating circumstances. No problem with different approach for Betfred which is a cup competition and only has teams playing 4 matches in a section not 36 games Utter bollocks 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowden Cowboy Posted April 15, 2019 Share Posted April 15, 2019 Just now, SLClyde said: No it isn’t. You can’t just pick and choose when you hand out full punishment and when you don’t. I didn’t expect the appeal to be successful but regardless the point stands on this. Yes you can - as sometimes there is mitigation and different competitions are played under different rules all the time. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clyde01 Posted April 15, 2019 Share Posted April 15, 2019 Surely it’s the responsibility of the governing body to check the team lines submitted after each fixture. The error should have been highlighted before it was allowed to happen a second time. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clydeontheup Posted April 15, 2019 Share Posted April 15, 2019 12 minutes ago, David W said: Now hopefully those resignations have been revisited. Fully expect your board ratification to be forthcoming also 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowden Cowboy Posted April 15, 2019 Share Posted April 15, 2019 1 minute ago, Clyde01 said: Surely it’s the responsibility of the governing body to check the timelines submitted after each fixture. The error should have been highlighted before it was allowed to happen a second time. No it isn't every club knows it is their responsibility to only field eligible players - eg if a player is missed out on list of suspensions and you play him it is still a club error. That's 3 minutes ago, Clyde01 said: Surely it’s the responsibility of the governing body to check the timelines submitted after each fixture. The error should have been highlighted before it was allowed to happen a second time. No - there is no timescale set for that. But each club knows they should be entirely clear on the eligibility of any player they field. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clydeontheup Posted April 15, 2019 Share Posted April 15, 2019 4 minutes ago, Clyde01 said: Surely it’s the responsibility of the governing body to check the team lines submitted after each fixture. The error should have been highlighted before it was allowed to happen a second time. Course it should have been , but then it’s spfl admitting guilt or negligence . 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the_bully_wee Posted April 15, 2019 Share Posted April 15, 2019 No complaints about the sanctions overall, but can't help but feel as though it'd have been a very different story for a team higher up the food chain. Given the punishment dished out to Hearts, the many mitigating factors surrounding the breach and the ongoing muddied waters surrounding such breaches, it still seems pretty harsh all-told. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bullyweehutch Posted April 15, 2019 Share Posted April 15, 2019 I mean were we ever going to win? 1. We aren't the old firmAnd2. Why on earth would the SFA ever admit they were wrong? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
williebraveheart Posted April 15, 2019 Share Posted April 15, 2019 2 hours ago, the_bully_wee said: Would far rather the SFA upheld the initial sanctions and took further steps to shaft QP out of existence. Would take a positive outcome on either count, though. Two time loser. Shame. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the_bully_wee Posted April 15, 2019 Share Posted April 15, 2019 1 minute ago, williebraveheart said: Two time loser. Shame. How's the stadium sale going? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clydeontheup Posted April 15, 2019 Share Posted April 15, 2019 1 minute ago, the_bully_wee said: No complaints about the sanctions overall, but can't help but feel as though it'd have been a very different story for a team higher up the food chain. Given the punishment dished out to Hearts, the many mitigating factors surrounding the breach and the ongoing muddied waters surrounding such breaches, it still seems pretty harsh all-told. The only muddy ness is the difference in punishment. The rules were broken . The rules apply for all competitions. No mitigating circumstances nor precedent for what is an unprecedented punishment 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Only one David Marsh Posted April 15, 2019 Share Posted April 15, 2019 Well atleast it's over and we can move on and focus on winning the last 3 games and hoping our friends from Elgin, Stirling and QP can do us a favour 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowden Cowboy Posted April 15, 2019 Share Posted April 15, 2019 1 minute ago, bullyweehutch said: I mean were we ever going to win? 1. We aren't the old firm And 2. Why on earth would the SFA ever admit they were wrong? The SFA didn't make the original judgement so there was nothing for them to admit 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bullyweehutch Posted April 15, 2019 Share Posted April 15, 2019 The SFA didn't make the original judgement so there was nothing for them to admitOk, why would the SFA ever show a spine? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clyde01 Posted April 15, 2019 Share Posted April 15, 2019 The SFA didn't make the original judgement so there was nothing for them to admitWhy was the fact that we had played an illegible player not flagged up by the SPFL after the Albion Rovers match?Why were we then allowed to play him again vs QP.Incompetence by us and negligence by them. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SouthLanarkshireWhite Posted April 15, 2019 Share Posted April 15, 2019 2 minutes ago, williebraveheart said: Two time loser. Shame. Lets see you live up to your name! Get your big feather hat and see you jimmy t shirt on, then trot up to the home support next week and repeat the above at the top of your voice. You may need to do it several times before anyone notices you complete no mark. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bullyweehutch Posted April 15, 2019 Share Posted April 15, 2019 Let's just get behind the lads for the last 3 games. Peterhead could still drop points (as could we right enough) Sing our hearts out and sing f**k the SFA as loud as we can. [emoji837][emoji836][emoji835] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowden Cowboy Posted April 15, 2019 Share Posted April 15, 2019 Just now, Clydeontheup said: The only muddy ness is the difference in punishment. The rules were broken . The rules apply for all competitions. No mitigating circumstances nor precedent for what is an unprecedented punishment The rules aren't the same for every competition - for example some suspensions only apply to Cup games or League games, the Betfred Cup has sections, knockout rounds, bonus points, penalty shoot outs so lots of different rules for different competitions. The points deductions though aren't even the contentious bit of the decision. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clydeontheup Posted April 15, 2019 Share Posted April 15, 2019 1 minute ago, Cowden Cowboy said: The rules aren't the same for every competition - for example some suspensions only apply to Cup games or League games, the Betfred Cup has sections, knockout rounds, bonus points, penalty shoot outs so lots of different rules for different competitions. The points deductions though aren't even the contentious bit of the decision. The eligibility of players rule is exactly the same 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.0f22cbd69b64158ca718c66b4e426366.jpg)
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.