QPR - Points Deduction

[SussexHoop]

I understand the new rules came into force on 4 August 2009 effective from 4 July 2009. We announced the signing of Faurlin on 6th/7th July 2009 so I think that's saying we weren't doing anthing wrong when we signed him but a few weeks later, it was deemed to be a breach of the rules.

 

[BensGrandad]

surely QPR argument would be that as the FL decide on promotion and relegation from within their leagues if they havent broken any of those rules they cannot be refused promotion and that the FA should impose a penalty that doesnt jeopardise that position and if they do it is then outside of their powers and therefore not legally binding.

 

[Husty]

surely QPR argument would be that as the FL decide on promotion and relegation if they havent broken any of those rules they cannot be refused promotion and that the FA should impose a penalty that doesnt jeopardise that position and if they do it is then outside of their powers and therefore not legally binding.

I'd agree in principle, but I'm almost certain that there will be a line somewhere in some legally binding document whereby the FL agrees to impose punishment decided by the FA, or that when clubs sign up to the FL they also agree to abide by all FA rules or something which would null your point.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

It's to do with various infringements that occur in the single process.

The club have been charged with
-agreeing a deal with a third party for the player's economic rights
-allegedly failing to notify the FA of the arrangement before registering Faurlin.
-alleged to have used or sought to pay an unauthorised agent in relation to Faurlin's registration in July 2009.
-club official Gianni Paladini has been charged, along with Rangers, over documents alleged to be false which were sent to the FA when the 24-year-old extended his contract at Loftus Road in October last year. (I imagine that's one infringement per forged document, or something to make it seven).

TheFA.com - QPR and Paladini charged

If QPR are guilty of these charges then I really cannot see an arguement against them having a points deduction. These are not minor issues. Points seem a fairer way of punishing such crimes, monetry fines will mean little to such a wealthy club. Further, it will put a financial price on such activities which some clubs might then consider paying. As for the arguement about it taking too long to conclude.....I guess cases like this do take a long time. If everything I've read is correct then I feel this is a suitable conclusion for everyone.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

surely QPR argument would be that as the FL decide on promotion and relegation from within their leagues if they havent broken any of those rules they cannot be refused promotion and that the FA should impose a penalty that doesnt jeopardise that position and if they do it is then outside of their powers and therefore not legally binding.

I personally think the FA and the FL's legal bods might actually know what they're doing. And subsequently dish out a legally tight punishment.

 

[SussexHoop]

I think a points deduction is best, assuming that is the set punishment for the new rules.

From what I've read, there is no set punishment so they can make it up as they go. One of the Bristol teams didn't get a points deduction for using unauthorised agents, Luton did. West Ham didn't receive a points deduction over the Tevez affair. When we signed Faurlin, the same rules were in existence. Applying rules retrospectively has to be subject to a challenge surely?

A bit like doing 70 mph on the A27 today, then in a month's time they drop the speed limit to 50mph effective from today and you get done for it. Not illegal at the time but made illegal at a later date - hardly fair and just.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

I understand the new rules came into force on 4 August 2009 effective from 4 July 2009. We announced the signing of Faurlin on 6th/7th July 2009 so I think that's saying we weren't doing anthing wrong when we signed him but a few weeks later, it was deemed to be a breach of the rules.

Really? The FA/FL passed a retropective piece of legislation? I find this hard to believe because, as you say, it immediately made criminals of innocent people.

 

[BensGrandad]

I personally think the FA and the FL's legal bods might actually know what they're doing. And subsequently dish out a legally tight punishment.

I wish I had your confidence because what 1 lawyer thinks is full proof another one finds a loop hole in or at least thinks he has found a loop hole which is sufficient to take it to court, and thus delay or stop the play offs and promotion.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

I wish I had your confidence because what 1 lawyer thinks is full proof another one finds a loop hole in or at least thinks he has found a loop hole which is sufficient to take it to court, and thus delay or stop the play offs and promotion.

Fair comment. My reasoning is that I cannot think of any examples where the FA/FL have dished out punishment which has subsequently been totally overturned. I'm sure you will now find some examples for me

 

[Husty]

From what I've read, there is no set punishment so they can make it up as they go. One of the Bristol teams didn't get a points deduction for using unauthorised agents, Luton did. West Ham didn't receive a points deduction over the Tevez affair. When we signed Faurlin, the same rules were in existence. Applying rules retrospectively has to be subject to a challenge surely?

A bit like doing 70 mph on the A27 today, then in a month's time they drop the speed limit to 50mph effective from today and you get done for it. Not illegal at the time but made illegal at a later date - hardly fair and just.

The FL didn't just bring these rules in on a whim, I am positive QPR would have been fully aware of the fact these rules would shortly be coming into effect, you broke the rules you should be punished, your A27 comparison is laughable at best.

 

[seagullsovergrimsby]

Football League rules and regulations :-


77.3 Where a matter is referred to The Football Association, it shall be entitled to exercise all the powers and sanctions set out in these Regulations in relation to The Football League Club, its Officials and Players.

 

[Husty]

Really? The FA/FL passed a retropective piece of legislation? I find this hard to believe because, as you say, it immediately made criminals of innocent people.

Well the players contracts are up 31st june normally so they had to do it then, they cant have 2 halfs of a transfer window with different rules, I'm sure they gave clubs plenty of notice, and absolutely no one else had a problem.

 

[seagullsovergrimsby]

Fair comment. My reasoning is that I cannot think of any examples where the FA/FL have dished out punishment which has subsequently been totally overturned. I'm sure you will now find some examples for me

I think Swindon were going to be demoted 2 divisions but this was overturned on appeal and they ended up with a slap on the wrist.

 

[Husty]

Football League rules and regulations :-


77.3 Where a matter is referred to The Football Association, it shall be entitled to exercise all the powers and sanctions set out in these Regulations in relation to The Football League Club, its Officials and Players.

Precisely, they arnt amateurs

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Well the players contracts are up 31st june normally so they had to do it then, they cant have 2 halfs of a transfer window with different rules, I'm sure they gave clubs plenty of notice, and absolutely no one else had a problem.

Good point, seemingly no one else got caught out. Doesn't the QPR owner have some 'previous' in another sport?

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

I think Swindon were going to be demoted 2 divisions but this was overturned on appeal and they ended up with a slap on the wrist.

I thought it was a 2 league demotion which was cut to 1 league on appeal? They were still found guilty, it was just the severity of sentence which was an issue.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Anyway, I have had a Pimms and a pint of Red Stripe. Time for a snooze now.

 

[severnside gull]

Points deduction would be the appropriate way to deal with it I think as there is ample precedent. The main reservation I have is that the FL announced about 6 weeks ago that the hearing would be next week. Is that timely in the circumstances? Certainly provides an easy grounds for appeal and a right royal f@*k-up over the summer.

 

[Theatre of Trees]

Really? The FA/FL passed a retropective piece of legislation? I find this hard to believe because, as you say, it immediately made criminals of innocent people.

See

I understand the new rules came into force on 4 August 2009 effective from 4 July 2009. We announced the signing of Faurlin on 6th/7th July 2009 so I think that's saying we weren't doing anthing wrong when we signed him but a few weeks later, it was deemed to be a breach of the rules.

It looks like the retrospective part was bought in to align the date with the what is generally deemed the start of the contract year for clubs and players. I would imagine this missive would then have been sent to all football clubs to enable them to sort out any issues. However, one of the charges relates to false documentation when the contract was extended in October last year which could point to something underhand going on or not changed in the intervening period.

 

[Theatre of Trees]

I thought it was a 2 league demotion which was cut to 1 league on appeal? They were still found guilty, it was just the severity of sentence which was an issue.

Swindon won promotion to the top division via the play offs, were then found guilty of false payments and were initially demoted to the third tier. They appealed with the sentence reduced to demotion to the second tier in effect negating their promotion. The team they beat in the play-off final, Sunderland, were promoted instead.