Haywards Heath 9pt Deduction!

[Conelli98]

SCFL tonight handed Heath a nine point deduction costing them title and promotion. FISHER ATHLETIC...you should be ashamed and same said for SUSSEX FA and SCFL for not sticking by your member club!

 

[spence]

Would help if you give us details of why they were punished for those who don't know

 

[LamieRobertson]

Fielding an ineligible player?

 

[drew]

SCFL tonight handed Heath a nine point deduction costing them title and promotion. FISHER ATHLETIC...you should be ashamed and same said for SUSSEX FA and SCFL for not sticking by your member club!

Did they or did they not break the rules?

 

[AZ Gull]

Would help if you give us details of why they were punished for those who don't know

Melford Simpson

 

[Petee]

In all fairness, they fielded a player who was suspended. They should've checked it out.

 

[The Birdman]

Lots of football leauge clubs broke the FP rules I always think the punishments are worse at the lower levels.

 

[studio150]

In all fairness, they fielded a player who was suspended. They should've checked it out.

If I have read this correctly the player is suspended sine die therefore I would assume he knew he was suspended forever and its not just a mix up over the number of games that they have been suspended from.

 

[Blackadder]

Bugger!

 

[BensGrandad]

It was in the past that County associations only notified their immediate neighbouring counties ie Sussex would notify Surrey Hants and Kent If he was from Yorkshire nobody would now. Since those days computers have come more to prominence and use so perhaps its now all goes on 1 site so any county could check and see so no excuse to say you didnt know ort tell you.

 

[Official Old Man]

So I understand this from a HH fan.
The club secretary checks with an FA web site prior to signing a player to see if he has any previous cards etc. This player came up clean and so was signed. Two days later his profile was changed on the web site but of course the secretary had no reason to go back and check. No letters were sent to HH telling them he was banned.
Fisher Athletic did pay some fines it seems but they didn't specify who the fines were for. It's like getting 10 court fines for £1000 and paying £900 without saying which fines you were paying.

 

[GT49er]

It was in the past that County associations only notified their immediate neighbouring counties ie Sussex would notify Surrey Hants and Kent If he was from Yorkshire nobody would now. Since those days computers have come more to prominence and use so perhaps its now all goes on 1 site so any county could check and see so no excuse to say you didnt know ort tell you.

If you look at the other thread about this, it appears that yes, there is a computer database, and yes it was duly checked. Apparently though, it hadn't been updated, and was only updated after the check had been made.
Doesn't reflect well on the football authorities if you ask me. If it had been Chelsea or Man.City or Arsenal or the like, they'd have probably received an apology, not a 9 point deduction.

 

[Postman Pat]

So I understand this from a HH fan.
The club secretary checks with an FA web site prior to signing a player to see if he has any previous cards etc. This player came up clean and so was signed. Two days later his profile was changed on the web site but of course the secretary had no reason to go back and check. No letters were sent to HH telling them he was banned.
Fisher Athletic did pay some fines it seems but they didn't specify who the fines were for. It's like getting 10 court fines for £1000 and paying £900 without saying which fines you were paying.

Wouldn't the player have been aware he was banned/ no longer banned? I have no idea how this all works.

Seems like Sussex FA gave them a slap on the wrist and then the SCFL came along and gave them a kick in the balls!

 

[Cowfold Seagull]

So, it's the Musselmen of Shoreham who benefit from all this, and Sam Donnelly gets to manage his new team in the Ryman League for the first time next season.

 

[Boys 9d]

Haywards Heath do however have 14 days to appeal the decision.

 

[dejavuatbtn]

HH should sue the player for signing a contract when he knew he was banned for life.

 

[Cowfold Seagull]

HH should sue the player for signing a contract when he knew he was banned for life.

The onus is on the club to check on that, before they accept his signature really

 

[darkwolf666]

The onus is on the club to check on that, before they accept his signature really

Which they did...

 

[Cowfold Seagull]

Which they did...

Allegedly so. I was referring to dejavuatbtn post really.

 

[BensGrandad]

The problem comes when a player moves from a county some distance away having been banned under the name of Michael Brown and when signing for a club says his name is Michael Smith and he hasnt played football since school. Nobody would check or be any the wiser. When I was on Surrey FA the FA asked Surrey to trial a scheme of all players having a registration card that was handed to the ref before the game and then the yellow and red carded players card was withheld until a charge or points had been added by the County FA. It was not carried out because the refs wouldnt accept responsibility for checking the identity cards and as many junior secretarys said it was enough to get a junior player to remember kick off times with out adding to remember to carry their registration cards.

I know this wasnt the case here but it makes checking difficult.