Jump to content

Bo'ness United 2018/19


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, 8MileBU said:

 


100% this. Can’t have one rule for one and another rule for others. But then it’s the SFA we’re talking about.

 

Not to argue because they're hopeless in all areas but the SPFL administer the League Cup rather than the SFA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are Bo’ness or Haddington appealing? I see Haddington’s punishment is heavier than that of Bo’ness.
I am not for a minute saying Bo’ness were not at fault, what I am saying is that the punishment does not fit the crime if you look at the precedent set by the SPFL, EOSFL are part of the same governing association so one set of rules should apply.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Legless said:

Are Bo’ness or Haddington appealing? I see Haddington’s punishment is heavier than that of Bo’ness.
I am not for a minute saying Bo’ness were not at fault, what I am saying is that the punishment does not fit the crime if you look at the precedent set by the SPFL, EOSFL are part of the same governing association so one set of rules should apply.

Bo'ness had 1 wrong un

Haddington had 2 wrong uns.

On what grounds could they possibly appeal "um, we didnt check the suspension list properly. Please please please let us back in!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not to argue because they're hopeless in all areas but the SPFL administer the League Cup rather than the SFA.


Aye you know what I meant and they’re all under the jurisdiction of the SFA’s eagle eye anyway.


Are Bo’ness or Haddington appealing? I see Haddington’s punishment is heavier than that of Bo’ness.
I am not for a minute saying Bo’ness were not at fault, what I am saying is that the punishment does not fit the crime if you look at the precedent set by the SPFL, EOSFL are part of the same governing association so one set of rules should apply.


Haddington’s punishment does seem a bit more harsh. It’s all a bit of a shambles but it’s a shame they couldn’t just order the clubs to replay the match ensuring all players are eligible. Never going to happen though. Dundonald would feel aggrieved, and should Bo’ness or Haddington then go into beat Camelon, they’d then feel aggrieved. It’s also a bit pish and an anti-climax for Camelon seeing as they might now win the cup but not get the chance to actually play in a Cup Final.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Legless said:

I see Haddington’s punishment is heavier than that of Bo’ness.

They have both been put out of 1 edition of the competition... Bo'ness (who won) are expelled from this season's, and Haddington (who lost) are banned from next season's. Both are the usual punishment: Dundonald got put out of this season's South Challenge Cup (is worth saying it isn't run by EOSFA or EOSFL) having beaten Eyemouth, plus Leith were banned from this season's King Cup having lost to Kelty in last season's SF.

I suppose you can set-up an existential or philosophical conundrum... in that if you expelled Bo'ness first you reinstate Haddington, then you expel them... but it's a bit like the peer and his son who were killed outright by the same bomb blast during WWII, with the question of who died first affecting the title and potentially the line of inheritance. It's surely impossible to say given it happened simultaneously. If you wanted to be literal the Bo'ness offence happened "2nd" as their man came on as a substitute, going by the match report? Indeed in some places he's credited with the goal which turned a draw into a win :(.

 

2 hours ago, Marten said:

Hearts did this in a group game. Had they done it in a knockout game, the SPFL would have had to kick them out.

Controversy centred around Hearts being deducted 2pts not 3pts, IIRC, leaving qualification possible.

I don't recall expulsion from the groupstage being advocated.

EDIT: Oddly enough a benefit of EOS Qualifying League being so - not an EOS League Cup groupstage - is players can't be cup-tied, trialists can appear, and offences are "league based".

Edited by HibeeJibee
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bo'ness had 1 wrong un
Haddington had 2 wrong uns.
On what grounds could they possibly appeal "um, we didnt check the suspension list properly. Please please please let us back in!"

On the grounds the punishment doesn’t fit the crime, just look at Hearts, they are playing a semifinal this weekend and they fielded an ineligible player in an earlier round.
It may be different league bodies however they are all administered by the SFA.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Legless said:


On the grounds the punishment doesn’t fit the crime, just look at Hearts, they are playing a semifinal this weekend and they fielded an ineligible player in an earlier round.
It may be different league bodies however they are all administered by the SFA.

Thats a totally seperate issue though you are effectively saying that a Cellicfooballclub player being suspended for a EUFA Cup game but still being allowed to play in the Scottish Cup or vice versa would also be wrong when it isnt as they are governed by seperate bodies even if they are all administered by EUFA. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thats a totally seperate issue though you are effectively saying that a Cellicfooballclub player being suspended for a EUFA Cup game but still being allowed to play in the Scottish Cup or vice versa would also be wrong when it isnt as they are governed by seperate bodies even if they are all administered by EUFA. 

Can you read? I am saying the punishment does not fit the crime, as a precedent has already been set. The SFA administer both registrations and suspensions, Hearts field an ineligible player and remain in the said tournament, Dundonald, Bo’ness and Haddington commit a similar offence and are expelled, if the SFA administers suspensions and registration then the punishment should be similar!
There is no consistency in Scottish football and as such this competition is a laughingstock, either that or the SPFL cup is a joke!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Official BU website has a statement from the chairman which sets out the position and says (1) the club are taking professional advice and (2) the Chairman is considering his own position.

Should the club appeal ? In my opinion it's a total waste of time if the "defence" is we didn't bother checking and the player assured us he was OK to play .

Should the chairman resign ? Don't know enough about who does what at the club or what checks the BU did before naming the player in the squad.

Irrespective of these matters the ejection from the Cup is a massive disappointment to the BU fans.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can read, I'm not sure I understand what Hearts have to do with this situation though. Thats a totally seperate competition managed by a seperate organisation.

You chose not to understand, simple terms Hearts played ineligible player and still in relevant tournament! Why should there be a difference in any tournament where the SFA administers the registrations and suspensions, you may not like it but it’s fact.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Official BU website has a statement from the chairman which sets out the position and says (1) the club are taking professional advice and (2) the Chairman is considering his own position.

Should the club appeal ? In my opinion it's a total waste of time if the "defence" is we didn't bother checking and the player assured us he was OK to play .

Should the chairman resign ? Don't know enough about who does what at the club or what checks the BU did before naming the player in the squad.

Irrespective of these matters the ejection from the Cup is a massive disappointment to the BU fans.



The only appeal in my opinion is did the punishment fit the crime, There is a precedent.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Legless said:


Can you read? I am saying the punishment does not fit the crime, as a precedent has already been set. The SFA administer both registrations and suspensions, Hearts field an ineligible player and remain in the said tournament, Dundonald, Bo’ness and Haddington commit a similar offence and are expelled, if the SFA administers suspensions and registration then the punishment should be similar!
There is no consistency in Scottish football and as such this competition is a laughingstock, either that or the SPFL cup is a joke!

The EoS administer this tournament, and it’s their own local cup rules that count. It’s possible for different leagues and associations to have different sets of regulations for their own tournaments.

The SFA regulate  the suspensions, it’s up to the relevant body to decide what the punishment is for any ineligibility issues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, boness4ever said:

I’m assuming Comrie still has a 2 game ban to serve??

According to the most up to date  suspension list (which takes less than 10 seconds to access :( )  Craig Comrie now only has a 1 match ban as they have rightly counted the Haddington game as the first game he "missed".  

The same list shows Josh MacDonald has a 2 game ban . 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...