readingstockport
New member
Timbo said:
Ermm, was this directed at me Timbo? I agree with you wholeheartedly. Not disagree.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
One of those Petitians, for AFC Wimbledon this time
- Thread starter Superphil
- Start date
Ermm, was this directed at me Timbo? I agree with you wholeheartedly. Not disagree.
Da Man Clay
T'Blades
- Dec 16, 2004
- 16,286
Superphil said:
If West Ham dont get the same punishment then I would agree that its a bit harsh. Bury (I believe it was them who were kicked out of the cup) would have kicked up a huge fuss if AFC wimbledon didn't get the same punishment as them.
Silent Bob
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
- Dec 6, 2004
- 22,172
Bloody arrogant admin errors!Dave the Gaffer said:
Dave the OAP
Well-known member
Silent Bob said:
totally and absolutely
Silent Bob
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
- Dec 6, 2004
- 22,172
Why would more be made? It's not like they gained anything from it, they just forgot/overlooked to tick a box when filling in a form! It's nothing like West Ham really.Kinky Gerbils said:
Simster said:
I dont think the club is I think the fans have a certain "superfan" feeling
Why is it boring to me?
I just think that maybe its time to leave what happened in the past, Plus every time something goes wrong they are always seen as the innocent party, yes my all means appeal but to me they have broken the rules and should have points taken away - the fine I agree is a bit much. - As someone else said would there be the same coverage if it was another club - I dont think Crawley got as much even when they had 10 points taken off.
Maybe they should be looking at the clubs admin staff instead of the FA who are going to (or at least going to be seen) be trying to deal with things like this in the same way all the time the West Ham issue is in the press and Bury waiting to sue at the first chance they get.
Maybe they should be looking at the clubs admin staff instead of the FA who are going to (or at least going to be seen) be trying to deal with things like this in the same way all the time the West Ham issue is in the press and Bury waiting to sue at the first chance they get.
Superphil
Dismember
- Thread starter
- #34
As a clerical error I can understand the club being fined to encourage them to review their procedures and get it right in the future.
But as the player would have been allowed to play if they hadn't mucked up his paperwork, then what difference does the on-pitch performance make.
All the players, him included, were playing the best they could to get promotion. The players and fans will be punished for a matter that has nothing to do with the footballing ability of the club.
But as the player would have been allowed to play if they hadn't mucked up his paperwork, then what difference does the on-pitch performance make.
All the players, him included, were playing the best they could to get promotion. The players and fans will be punished for a matter that has nothing to do with the footballing ability of the club.
What did Bury fans do wrong?
Storer68
New member
Is AFC Wimbledon's oversight worse than Milan's ref fixing?
The FA must show some common sense and re-think AFC Wimbledon's 18-point deduction for fielding an ineligible player.
Richard WilliamsFebruary 27, 2007 01:05 AM
AFC Wimbledon returned to the top of the Ryman Premier League on Saturday after a 3-2 home win over Billericay Town. But a very big shadow hangs over the continued success of the team whose achievements, including two promotions in the 4½ years of their existence, give pleasure to anyone unable to shake off the belief that football clubs are not mere franchises with souls that can be bought and sold by strangers.
Sometime in the next week or two the Football Association will consider the appeal of AFC - as they are known to their fans - against an 18-point deduction imposed when it was discovered that they had failed to complete the proper registration procedures for a player who had represented them in league and cup fixtures.
When Jermaine Darlington joined the club last October, he became the first man to play competitive football for both AFC Wimbledon and Wimbledon FC, in whose colours he appeared before his career took him to Watford and Cardiff City. It was because AFC did not declare that he had previously been registered with a foreign governing body - the Welsh FA - while playing for Cardiff in the English league that they have been thrown out of the FA Trophy and docked all the points earned from the league matches in which he appeared.
The fact that the process of regularising Darlington's position took a couple of hours and the exchange of two emails suggests that this was never exactly the crime of the century. Nor, it seems transparently clear, was it the result of anything other than an oversight.
A 32-year-old left-sided midfield player versatile enough to have filled in at right-back in Saturday's victory, Darlington left Cardiff by mutual consent after a series of injury problems. His contract was terminated and, in effect, he retired.
Some time after returning to the London area, however, he started playing for a Sunday amateur team in north London and discovered that he could get by. Dave Ambrose, AFC's manager, heard about it and, knowing Darlington from their early days together at Aylesbury, invited him to turn out for the reserve team. When that went well, he was moved up to the first-team squad.
Erik Samuelson, AFC's chief executive, told me yesterday that the problem came to light only when Darlington got himself booked in their FA Trophy third-round victory over Gravesend and Northfleet. When his caution was processed through the FA database, Wimbledon's failure to register his switch from the Welsh to the English FA showed up.
Believing that his last club had been the amateur outfit in north London, they failed to tick the box marked "yes" next to the question asking whether the player's registration had been held by a foreign association. For that they were thrown out of the Trophy with no right of appeal, costing them around £12,000 in repaid prize money, before the Ryman League authorities announced the 18-point penalty, which would put them down to 12th place in the current standings.
It seems typical of AFC that their fans, who created the club when the old Wimbledon left town to become Milton Keynes Dons, should respond to the bad news by producing a season's best home attendance of 2,963 against Bromley at Kingsmeadow two weeks ago. Petitions are being organised in time for the appeal, and Jim Sturman, a prominent QC who also acts for Chelsea, has told the club that he will represent their case without a fee all the way to the High Court and the European Court, if necessary (as the first man to earn £1m from legal aid work, he can presumably afford it).
According to Samuelson, there is a diversity of views among their Ryman Premier rivals. "There are people who say that rules are rules. There are those who prefer to stay out of it. And there are those who've written to say they think it's crazy."
As he points out, the scale of the punishment appears even more absurd when compared with those inflicted on the game's grandees for far more serious offences. "Look at AC Milan," he said. "An eight-point deduction for four years of trying to influence referees. We believe that we're the victims of a ludicrously disproportionate penalty."
So do I. And at a time when the FA and the Premier League can smooth the passage of Javier Mascherano from Corinthians to Liverpool via West Ham, thus overriding Fifa's ruling that no one can play for more than two clubs in any given year, it seems to confirm that there is one law for the big battalions and another for the minnows. Here, surely, is an opportunity for the authorities to show some common sense.
The FA must show some common sense and re-think AFC Wimbledon's 18-point deduction for fielding an ineligible player.
Richard WilliamsFebruary 27, 2007 01:05 AM
AFC Wimbledon returned to the top of the Ryman Premier League on Saturday after a 3-2 home win over Billericay Town. But a very big shadow hangs over the continued success of the team whose achievements, including two promotions in the 4½ years of their existence, give pleasure to anyone unable to shake off the belief that football clubs are not mere franchises with souls that can be bought and sold by strangers.
Sometime in the next week or two the Football Association will consider the appeal of AFC - as they are known to their fans - against an 18-point deduction imposed when it was discovered that they had failed to complete the proper registration procedures for a player who had represented them in league and cup fixtures.
When Jermaine Darlington joined the club last October, he became the first man to play competitive football for both AFC Wimbledon and Wimbledon FC, in whose colours he appeared before his career took him to Watford and Cardiff City. It was because AFC did not declare that he had previously been registered with a foreign governing body - the Welsh FA - while playing for Cardiff in the English league that they have been thrown out of the FA Trophy and docked all the points earned from the league matches in which he appeared.
The fact that the process of regularising Darlington's position took a couple of hours and the exchange of two emails suggests that this was never exactly the crime of the century. Nor, it seems transparently clear, was it the result of anything other than an oversight.
A 32-year-old left-sided midfield player versatile enough to have filled in at right-back in Saturday's victory, Darlington left Cardiff by mutual consent after a series of injury problems. His contract was terminated and, in effect, he retired.
Some time after returning to the London area, however, he started playing for a Sunday amateur team in north London and discovered that he could get by. Dave Ambrose, AFC's manager, heard about it and, knowing Darlington from their early days together at Aylesbury, invited him to turn out for the reserve team. When that went well, he was moved up to the first-team squad.
Erik Samuelson, AFC's chief executive, told me yesterday that the problem came to light only when Darlington got himself booked in their FA Trophy third-round victory over Gravesend and Northfleet. When his caution was processed through the FA database, Wimbledon's failure to register his switch from the Welsh to the English FA showed up.
Believing that his last club had been the amateur outfit in north London, they failed to tick the box marked "yes" next to the question asking whether the player's registration had been held by a foreign association. For that they were thrown out of the Trophy with no right of appeal, costing them around £12,000 in repaid prize money, before the Ryman League authorities announced the 18-point penalty, which would put them down to 12th place in the current standings.
It seems typical of AFC that their fans, who created the club when the old Wimbledon left town to become Milton Keynes Dons, should respond to the bad news by producing a season's best home attendance of 2,963 against Bromley at Kingsmeadow two weeks ago. Petitions are being organised in time for the appeal, and Jim Sturman, a prominent QC who also acts for Chelsea, has told the club that he will represent their case without a fee all the way to the High Court and the European Court, if necessary (as the first man to earn £1m from legal aid work, he can presumably afford it).
According to Samuelson, there is a diversity of views among their Ryman Premier rivals. "There are people who say that rules are rules. There are those who prefer to stay out of it. And there are those who've written to say they think it's crazy."
As he points out, the scale of the punishment appears even more absurd when compared with those inflicted on the game's grandees for far more serious offences. "Look at AC Milan," he said. "An eight-point deduction for four years of trying to influence referees. We believe that we're the victims of a ludicrously disproportionate penalty."
So do I. And at a time when the FA and the Premier League can smooth the passage of Javier Mascherano from Corinthians to Liverpool via West Ham, thus overriding Fifa's ruling that no one can play for more than two clubs in any given year, it seems to confirm that there is one law for the big battalions and another for the minnows. Here, surely, is an opportunity for the authorities to show some common sense.
Da Man Clay
T'Blades
- Dec 16, 2004
- 16,286
And at a time when the FA and the Premier League can smooth the passage of Javier Mascherano from Corinthians to Liverpool via West Ham, thus overriding Fifa's ruling that no one can play for more than two clubs in any given year, it seems to confirm that there is one law for the big battalions and another for the minnows. Here, surely, is an opportunity for the authorities to show some common sense.
Which isn't quite whats happened is it? West Ham have been charged with the same offence have they not?
Which isn't quite whats happened is it? West Ham have been charged with the same offence have they not?