Non League Matters - The Continuation of Tonys english Football Site 



  Main Index MAIN
INDEX
Search Posts SEARCH
POSTS
Who's Online WHO'S
ONLINE
Log in LOG
IN

Home: Non-League Football Discussion: General Discussion:
Oxford United Charged

 

First page Previous page 1 2 3 Next page Last page  View All


coupwotcoup
First Team Star


Jan 21, 2009, 10:10 AM

Posts: 1577
Location:
Team(s): Romford

Post #51 of 63 (1256 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Over the top] Oxford United...and Bognor... Charged [In reply to] Can't Post or Reply Privately

Somebody should inform Setanta.. their Conference table is a tad out of date..



Pre-1970 football programmes wanted. Good prices paid for good condition collections. Have thousands for sale, League and Non League. PM with wants lists or for quotes. Especially required pre-1978 Romford home and aways, plus FA Trophy programmes from any rounds from seasons 69-70 and 70-1.


northstandexile
First Team Regular

Jan 21, 2009, 10:51 PM

Posts: 1389
Location: Mansfield
Team(s): Mansfield Town

Post #52 of 63 (1187 views)
Shortcut
Re: [coupwotcoup] Oxford United...and Bognor... Charged [In reply to] Can't Post or Reply Privately

Points aren't deducted until the 14 days appeal period have elasped.


Over the top
First Team Sub

Jan 26, 2009, 9:46 PM

Posts: 1093
Location:
Team(s):

Post #53 of 63 (1109 views)
Shortcut
Re: [northstandexile] Oxford United...and Bognor... Charged [In reply to] Can't Post or Reply Privately

Oxford United have just announced that they will NOT appeal over the 5 point penalty imposed for the Conference losing Eddie Hutchinson's registration. They have taken legal advice and see no point in risking a larger penalty.
The club state that they feel angry frustrated and harshly treated. Full statement on the official club website


Ashtree RockBee
First Team Star


Jan 26, 2009, 10:05 PM

Posts: 2015
Location: Ashford, Middlesex
Team(s): Ashford Town (Middlesex), Bognor Regis Town, Brentford

Post #54 of 63 (1094 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Over the top] Oxford United...and Bognor... Charged [In reply to] Can't Post or Reply Privately

For similar reasons to Oxford (although probably without taking legal advice), and feeling just as frustrated, Bognor have also decided not to appeal against their 7-point deduction. This virtually relegates the club in January unless something miraculous happens.


burgesshillbee
First Team Star

Jan 26, 2009, 10:56 PM

Posts: 1945
Location: A Town in Mid Sussex
Team(s): Brentford

Post #55 of 63 (1071 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Ashtree RockBee] Oxford United...and Bognor... Charged [In reply to] Can't Post or Reply Privately

According to Crawley's website they are going to appeal having taken legal advice.

Also it appears that the registration fiasco has cost Bognor Regis their place in the Sussex Senior Cup as they have been removed from the Competition and both Hassocks and Chichester City have been reinstated who have both lost to Bognor though i belive the Bognor v Chichester game took place at the time this situation came to light,the Bognor website says they offered to withdraw but Sussex FA instructed the match against Chichester to go ahead.


ladderman
Man City Transfer Target!

Jan 27, 2009, 8:27 AM

Posts: 7323
Location: Bishop's Stortford
Team(s): Bishop's Stortford & Cambridge United

Post #56 of 63 (1034 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Over the top] Oxford United...and Bognor... Charged [In reply to] Can't Post or Reply Privately


Quote
They have taken legal advice and see no point in risking a larger penalty.


Surely an admission that both the Conference and Oxford were in the wrong, hence the the fact that Oxford didn't get as many points deducted as they could have ?


Jon M
Reserve Team Regular

Jan 27, 2009, 2:33 PM

Posts: 592
Location:
Team(s):

Post #57 of 63 (975 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ladderman] Oxford United...and Bognor... Charged [In reply to] Can't Post or Reply Privately


In Reply To

Quote
They have taken legal advice and see no point in risking a larger penalty.


Surely an admission that both the Conference and Oxford were in the wrong, hence the the fact that Oxford didn't get as many points deducted as they could have ?


I think it is fairly clear that in all four cases, something has gone wrong at some point in the - player signing form//form being sent//form being received//form being processed//club checking registration valid before playing player - loop.
In that aspect all four clubs are equally guilty, albeit at the hands of an badly administered process, and the Oxford statement admits that openly (as I think do the other three clubs).

The issue all along has been the penalty to be applied. The rules are clear in the penalties they can use, with the maximum penalty as all points gained from games in which the players featured while unregistered, with the option of substitute appearances being treated with discretion.

However, the fact that for three of the four cases, this discretion has been used to the full is an indication that the board recognise their own part in allowing players to feature in so many games (and therefore clock up potentially disastrous points tallys)without clubs being notified of the situation. It is presumably the use (or not) of this discretionary aspect that has led Crawley to appeal (and they would seem to have a case).

While there has been much debate over what an appropriate penalty should be in each of these cases, given the flaws identified in the checking process, an appeal has to based on the rules and procedures in place, not the ones that people think SHOULD be in place.
In which case, as each club have admitted an error in the process somewhere, then unless the board take an amazing (and incredibly unlikely) step and admit that they should have picked up each error at the first time of asking and will only penalise clubs the points from one game (and thus risking the wrath of other clubs), there is nowhere for the Oxford and Bognor penalties to go except upwards, which makes appealing pointless.

And for those who continue to believe that the four clubs should have been penalised the full points tally gained, and Oxford have only been let off because of who they are, then ask yourself this - were it an everpresent Burton or Histon player that had been playing unregistered up until the middle of November, would you now be stamping your feet demanding they have 40pts deducted and facing relegation to Step 2?

As I've said all along, I'd suggest all levels adopt a simple 3pt penalty for each misadministration error rather than this 'points gained' process (unless there has been deemed to be some deliberate deception involved), but unless the FA step in and implement it in this case (in a similar fashion to the AFCW incident) I cannot see it happening here.


MattRamLives
First Team Sub

Jan 27, 2009, 7:42 PM

Posts: 964
Location: Tibshelf Services - nearly
Team(s): Every Derbyshire team

Post #58 of 63 (928 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Jon M] Oxford United...and Bognor... Charged [In reply to] Can't Post or Reply Privately


In Reply To

In Reply To

Quote

snipped
As I've said all along, I'd suggest all levels adopt a simple 3pt penalty for each misadministration error rather than this 'points gained' process (unless there has been deemed to be some deliberate deception involved), but unless the FA step in and implement it in this case (in a similar fashion to the AFCW incident) I cannot see it happening here.



I have to agree with this - it does nt seem anything more than maladministration - that is nt necessarily pointed at the clubs either. I know clubs at Conference level perhaps have secretaries who are paid? or more experienced but really if Man U have nt Sir Alex aware of at least the probability of a rule I was aware of!?
The case of playing ringers or falsifying documents is very different.
The rules are over complicated and time consuming - an electric version to check at least for discrepencies followed up with a paper trail might be better
There does nt seem any suggestion of foul play just lack of checking - blimey what about finding out a player with a long career at international level isnt in fact qualified for the Republic of Ireland?
At youth level in many areas at youth level they have cards available (with photos) before the game for inspection.
A far poorer and lower level but almost seems a better system - mind these kids at good at forging


northstandexile
First Team Regular

Jan 30, 2009, 12:45 AM

Posts: 1389
Location: Mansfield
Team(s): Mansfield Town

Post #59 of 63 (852 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Jon M] Oxford United...and Bognor... Charged [In reply to] Can't Post or Reply Privately


In Reply To

In Reply To

Quote
They have taken legal advice and see no point in risking a larger penalty.


Surely an admission that both the Conference and Oxford were in the wrong, hence the the fact that Oxford didn't get as many points deducted as they could have ?


I think it is fairly clear that in all four cases, something has gone wrong at some point in the - player signing form//form being sent//form being received//form being processed//club checking registration valid before playing player - loop.
In that aspect all four clubs are equally guilty, albeit at the hands of an badly administered process, and the Oxford statement admits that openly (as I think do the other three clubs).

The issue all along has been the penalty to be applied. The rules are clear in the penalties they can use, with the maximum penalty as all points gained from games in which the players featured while unregistered, with the option of substitute appearances being treated with discretion.

However, the fact that for three of the four cases, this discretion has been used to the full is an indication that the board recognise their own part in allowing players to feature in so many games (and therefore clock up potentially disastrous points tallys)without clubs being notified of the situation. It is presumably the use (or not) of this discretionary aspect that has led Crawley to appeal (and they would seem to have a case).

While there has been much debate over what an appropriate penalty should be in each of these cases, given the flaws identified in the checking process, an appeal has to based on the rules and procedures in place, not the ones that people think SHOULD be in place.
In which case, as each club have admitted an error in the process somewhere, then unless the board take an amazing (and incredibly unlikely) step and admit that they should have picked up each error at the first time of asking and will only penalise clubs the points from one game (and thus risking the wrath of other clubs), there is nowhere for the Oxford and Bognor penalties to go except upwards, which makes appealing pointless.

And for those who continue to believe that the four clubs should have been penalised the full points tally gained, and Oxford have only been let off because of who they are, then ask yourself this - were it an everpresent Burton or Histon player that had been playing unregistered up until the middle of November, would you now be stamping your feet demanding they have 40pts deducted and facing relegation to Step 2?

As I've said all along, I'd suggest all levels adopt a simple 3pt penalty for each misadministration error rather than this 'points gained' process (unless there has been deemed to be some deliberate deception involved), but unless the FA step in and implement it in this case (in a similar fashion to the AFCW incident) I cannot see it happening here.



I think you will find that Mansfield Town were deducted the full three points for the match won against Histon when the player in question came on as an 82nd minute substitute in his second match after playing from the start in the first match which was drawn. ( four points in total)

Whereas Crawley and Oxford were deducted less points for matches in which the substitute played. This is the point that Mansfield fans feel is not understandable, wrong and not logical.


StokePriorAndy
First Team Star

Jan 30, 2009, 8:47 AM

Posts: 2118
Location: Blackwell Bromsgrove
Team(s): Bromsgrove Sporting, Bromsgrove Rovers, Tottenham H, Gainsborough Trinity

Post #60 of 63 (809 views)
Shortcut
Re: [northstandexile] Oxford United...and Bognor... Charged [In reply to] Can't Post or Reply Privately

With so many clubs falling foul of registration points deductions in one form or another surely now is the time for all clubs to press for a central registration database for all players in Senior Football.

It shouldn't be beyond even the FA to start at the top with the Premier League and work down each step and still have it all done by the end of the close season for use by the start of season 2009/10. You could do it on a microsoft access database in about two weeks and spend another two weeks validating the data. Then once up and running every player could have a unique player reference number to use all their career which would make it easy to check and easy to avoid multiple registrations for the same player. As a Spurs supporter I remembered the need to have some system of identification other than just the name as we did used to sing "There's only two Gary Stevens" in the 80s.

On a quick calculation, there'd probably be somewhere between 15-20,000 lines of data to be entered and after that one is done the FA could think about administering "ownership" of Youth level players!


ladderman
Man City Transfer Target!

Jan 30, 2009, 9:30 AM

Posts: 7323
Location: Bishop's Stortford
Team(s): Bishop's Stortford & Cambridge United

Post #61 of 63 (792 views)
Shortcut
Re: [StokePriorAndy] Oxford United...and Bognor... Charged [In reply to] Can't Post or Reply Privately

Of course they should do that.
It would raise the question of whether dual registration would still be allowed.


acmold
Man City Transfer Target!

Jan 30, 2009, 10:54 AM

Posts: 14497
Location:
Team(s):

Post #62 of 63 (770 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ladderman] Oxford United...and Bognor... Charged [In reply to] Can't Post or

I think the Mansfield case is just slightly different to the other's. They faxed a registration to the Conference so the player could play in the opening game of the season (?). Then sent the actual form by post, that did not arrive until the following Wednesday (?) according to the Conference, by which time they had played two games. They also failed to confirm that the fax had arrived. I also think they still have another case pending over the registration of a player who was registered with another club and played in games for Mansfield. It was in the Mansfield Chad a couple of weeks ago. They are wondering why this second case has taken 5 months to come before the Conference committee.


stourboy
First Team Star


Jan 30, 2009, 11:43 AM

Posts: 1571
Location: Stourbridge
Team(s): Stourbridge FC, Sheffield Wednesday

Post #63 of 63 (756 views)
Shortcut
Re: [StokePriorAndy] Oxford United...and Bognor... Charged [In reply to] Can't Post or Reply Privately

I would love to do that if they paid me Wink

First page Previous page 1 2 3 Next page Last page  View All
 
 


free hit counters

Search for (options) HOSTED BY SUMMIT SOCCER v.1.2.3