Droylsden chucked out of FA Cup

[Storer68]

didnt they field an illegible player??

forwards couldn't read his passes

 

[BensGrandad]

The mistake that they made you expect to happen sometimes witha Sunday league team but not a semi pro one.

 

[adrian29uk]

I feel sorry them. They could do with the cash. Would the same apply to a premiership club?

 

[BensGrandad]

Would the same apply to a premiership club?

In the same circumstances yes but a premiership club probably wouldnt commit the same offence.

 

[otk]

I feel sorry them. They could do with the cash. Would the same apply to a premiership club?

Unless it was West Ham v. Brighton of course

FA Cup third round January 2007

Mascherano played and it was later deemed that his registration was dodgy

But as it came to light further along the FA Cup trail, when more rounds had been played, nothing was done about it

 

[BensGrandad]

They were differnt circumstances and it was too far along when it came to light about 2 further rounds had been played. West Hams wasnt it Tevez not Macherano, was over a signing on query this was playing a player who was banned.

One was possibly a technical administration error the other was blatant cheating.

 

[Gully]

Talking of incompetency and the FA Cup, didn't the Albion once forget to enter in the correct manner and have to go through all the qualifying rounds instead of joining at the normal stage?

 

[otk]

They were differnt circumstances and it was too far along when it came to light about 2 further rounds had been played. West Hams wasnt it Tevez not Macherano, was over a signing on query this was playing a player who was banned.

One was possibly a technical administration error the other was blatant cheating.

My mistake, it was Tevez and not Mascherano

You're argument is that West Ham broke the rules 'a little bit' and Droylsden broke the rules 'a big bit'

I can't go along with that I'm afraid. Rules in football are made for all to abide by and if they don't, sanctions must follow

 

[Gully]

...that is like arguing the difference between doing 35 or 47mph in a 30 zone...either way it is still breaking the law, regardless of how much you do it by.

 

[BensGrandad]

...that is like arguing the difference between doing 35 or 47mph in a 30 zone...either way it is still breaking the law, regardless of how much you do it by.

If you do 35 you will get points if you do 65 you will get banned it is the difference in the severity of the offence, if you fiddle £100 off of yopur firm you will get less than if you fiddled £10k

 

[Publius Ovidius]

If you do 35 you will get points if you do 65 you will get banned it is the difference in the severity of the offence, if you fiddle £100 off of yopur firm you will get less than if you fiddled £10k

i would have thought if you fiddle 1p off your company you would get sacked...after all who wants to employ a dishonest person?

 

[drew]

They were differnt circumstances and it was too far along when it came to light about 2 further rounds had been played. West Hams wasnt it Tevez not Macherano, was over a signing on query this was playing a player who was banned.

One was possibly a technical administration error the other was blatant cheating.

Sorry, but which one are you accusing of blatant cheating. West Ham fielded a player whose registration was owned by a third party, against the rules of the FA as well as the Premiership I believe. I see that as being no different to fielding an illegible player. It later transpired that the club were also very economical with the truth when it advised details of the transfer. That's why Sheffield are currently in line for substantial damages so why doesn't it apply to us? We should be awarded the equivalent of the winners pot for that round at least.

 

[otk]

I would have thought that if Tevez's registration anomaly had come to light a couple of days after West Ham beat us in the FA Cup third round, there would have been much more of a furore and WH would have been thrown out of the competition, with us being reinstated. It was only because a couple of rounds more had been played that it was swept under the carpet

 

[BensGrandad]

Sorry, but which one are you accusing of blatant cheating. West Ham fielded a player whose registration was owned by a third party, against the rules of the FA as well as the Premiership I believe. I see that as being no different to fielding an illegible player. It later transpired that the club were also very economical with the truth when it advised details of the transfer. That's why Sheffield are currently in line for substantial damages so why doesn't it apply to us? We should be awarded the equivalent of the winners pot for that round at least.

At the time of the match the question of whether Tevez was or wasnt elligible to play hadnt been mentioned, by the time that question arose the cup rounds had moved on and West Ham had been knocked out and it would have not been practical to have replayed and rearranged all of those games.

The question of financial compensation, which is Sheff Utd and possibly our argument is different in that it could now be set at whatever limit.

Droylsden played a player who was banned and not permitted to play football, what would you expect the FL to have done had we played Virgo against Colchester, what could they do only award the game to the opponents as the FA have done with Droyslden and have done many times before with many clubs. Anybody who runs a junior club will be able to tell you of examples of the County FA doing this in cup matches when it has been found a certain player shouldnt have played.

 

[drew]

At the time of the match the question of whether Tevez was or wasnt elligible to play hadnt been mentioned, by the time that question arose the cup rounds had moved on and West Ham had been knocked out and it would have not been practical to have replayed and rearranged all of those games.

The question of financial compensation, which is Sheff Utd and possibly our argument is different in that it could now be set at whatever limit.

Droylsden played a player who was banned and not permitted to play football, what would you expect the FL to have done had we played Virgo against Colchester, what could they do only award the game to the opponents as the FA have done with Droyslden and have done many times before with many clubs. Anybody who runs a junior club will be able to tell you of examples of the County FA doing this in cup matches when it has been found a certain player shouldnt have played.

I take it that you agree then that WH were the blatant cheats as they knew the situation with Tevez's registration all along where as the Droylsden situation was due to an error on the part of the clubs secretary which they readily admit.

 

[BensGrandad]

No I do not, I believe that West Ham were unaware that his registration was held by a third party, ie that Argie fellow cant remember his name, they thought it was with the club that Tevez played for. Droyslden admitted that they made a mistake and the player shouldnt have played, thus they hung themselves.

 

[drew]

No I do not, I believe that West Ham were unaware that his registration was held by a third party, ie that Argie fellow cant remember his name, they thought it was with the club that Tevez played for. Droyslden admitted that they made a mistake and the player shouldnt have played, thus they hung themselves.

You are seriously funny or misguided if you think WH thought that!!! Best laugh I have had since I opened my xmas cracker!!!!!!!

 

[otk]

No I do not, I believe that West Ham were unaware that his registration was held by a third party, ie that Argie fellow cant remember his name, they thought it was with the club that Tevez played for. Droyslden admitted that they made a mistake and the player shouldnt have played, thus they hung themselves.

You make it sound like WH's club secretary had less of a grasp of the competition rules, player's required registration/eligibility status, than Droylsden's :thud:

 

[Freddie Goodwin.]

West Ham had those 2 players for a couple of months and it was always a dodgy signing so why didn't the FA scrutinise it right at the start?

 

[BensGrandad]

If it hadnt been picked up by then anybody would have assumed that the registration was ok.