More trouble for Gus

[AZ Gull]

That was because the Hartlepool player was suspended for yellow cards, not an administrative error due to the club secretary.

And?

 

[Chicken Runner61]

What about this one Gus?

Brighton boss Gus Poyet feels his side should be awarded three points after Hartlepool were charged with fielding an ineligible player against them.

Gary Liddle played in Pools' 2-0 League One victory at Victoria Park on Easter Monday when he should have been serving a two-match ban.

Poyet told his club's official website: "I am sure Hartlepool did not realise he was suspended. It was not a case of cheating, but they made a mistake and that player should not have been on the pitch so the three points should go to the opposition.

"They cannot just deduct the points from Hartlepool. For the sake of fair competition we should be awarded them. All teams play 46 games in a season so it would be unfair if we only played 45 matches.

"The Football League has to be careful with the decision they make. It does not matter if they did it with intention or not, the only decision they can make in this instance - and I would say the same if my team were the guilty party - is to give the three points to the opposition."

 

[Thunder Bolt]

And?

Playing a suspended player is totally different as the suspension is a punishment. Is Ji being punished for going out on loan or being Korean?


Of course, it's Gus so the book should be thrown at him!!

 

[AZ Gull]

Playing a suspended player is totally different as the suspension is a punishment. Is Ji being punished for going out on loan or being Korean?


Of course, it's Gus so the book should be thrown at him!!

Silly me. There was I thinking that in one case, an ineligible player had been fielded, and in the other case, an ineligible player had been fielded. I completely forgot that playing an ineligible player who was ineligible for reason A was a completely different kettle of fish to playing an ineligible player who was ineligible for reason B.

 

[Chicken Runner61]

Silly me. There was I thinking that in one case, an ineligible player had been fielded, and in the other case, an ineligible player had been fielded. I completely forgot that playing an ineligible player who was ineligible for reason A was a completely different kettle of fish to playing an ineligible player who was ineligible for reason B.

And I bet the secretary was sacrificed to save the deduction !

 

[Creaky]

Silly me. There was I thinking that in one case, an ineligible player had been fielded, and in the other case, an ineligible player had been fielded. I completely forgot that playing an ineligible player who was ineligible for reason A was a completely different kettle of fish to playing an ineligible player who was ineligible for reason B.

Well the FA obviously see the two cases as different as their rules specifically lay out.

In the general case their rule states:-
"Any club found to have played an ineligible player in a match shall have any points gained from that match deducted from its record and have levied upon it a fine"


And for the specific case, "The company may vary this decision in respect of the points gained only in circumstances where the ineligibility is due to the failure to obtain an International Transfer Certificate or where the ineligibility is related to the player’s status only"

Bit of a fuss over a purely administrative error.

 

[The Modfather]

He will have even more problems next season when his side are playing in the championship, and despite the parachute payments, he will not be able to attract any quality players to the sh*t hole that is Sunderland.

 

[Barrel of Fun]

Some people are a little over defensive of Gus.

It is potential trouble. The Premier League have been a bit snide in doing all of this behind closed doors. Is a financial punishment enough for fielding an ineligible player? I don't think so.

 

[Creaky]

Some people are a little over defensive of Gus.

It is potential trouble. The Premier League have been a bit snide in doing all of this behind closed doors. Is a financial punishment enough for fielding an ineligible player? I don't think so.

Maybe not but the FA obviously does and even foresaw this happening by allowing for just a fine in such cases.

 

[Chicken Runner61]

Maybe not but the FA obviously does and even foresaw this happening by allowing for just a fine in such cases.

The Fa didn't deduct points off West Ham but when Sheffield appealed when they got relegated the case was reopened wasn't it?

 

[Creaky]

The Fa didn't deduct points off West Ham but when Sheffield appealed when they got relegated the case was reopened wasn't it?

And the FAPL Arbitration Panel upheld the decision NOT to deduct points.

 

[lawros left foot]

If he was Welsh, the player would still be waiting for the first international clearance

 

[Ⓩ-Ⓐ-Ⓜ-Ⓞ-Ⓡ-Ⓐ]

If he was Welsh, the player would still be waiting for the first international clearance

He was registered with the Welsh FA

 

[OzMike]

Would much rather see them relegated because of Gus rather than something before Gus.

That said, I really don't hate the man like some on here.

Don't like him, don't hate him, don't anything him.