42nite Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aizoon Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
'Orns Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 Yes we get an expert opinion from Darren Gough Can't wait for this one, Super I wonder who gets to play the bad guy on this one? I'm going to say Durham, and they'll use something about us and Posh to really rile us up and get us to ring in Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
South Bristol Red Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 Andy Stockhausen ?@AndyStockhausen 8s9 seconds ago East, England I understand @bcfctweets are holding meeting this pm to decide what steps, if any, to take now that Fifa have fined West Ham. This isn't over yet.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Pickled Onion Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 Disgraceful. If West Ham now win the FA Cup that would be a very tarnished victory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UREDS_91 Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 Official statement: Club considering options. SH*T is going to go down! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
42nite Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 Go for it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Claret Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 Andy Stockhausen ?@AndyStockhausen 8s9 seconds ago East, England I understand @bcfctweets are holding meeting this pm to decide what steps, if any, to take now that Fifa have fined West Ham. This isn't over yet.... Yes it is... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chivs Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 Dear Mr Scudamore, Remember that interview you did before the West Ham game? Time to step up to the plate. regards, A Bristol City fan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhistleHappy Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 Talksport .. Now... Phone in debate.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 Talking on Talksport now. They seem on our side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WolfOfWestStreet Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 Dear Mr Scudamore, Remember that interview you did before the West Ham game? Time to step up to the plate. regards, A Bristol City fan. Out of his jurisdiction - he's in charge or the premier league not the football association Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Red Hat Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 Yes it is... No it isn't.......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 Go on Durham! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedRaw Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 Out of his jurisdiction - he's in charge or the premier league not the football association Since when has rules and jurisdiction meant anything to Prem teams Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frenchay Red Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 This Talksport ex cricket bloke is a complete idiot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chivs Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 Out of his jurisdiction - he's in charge or the premier league not the football association So he has jurisdiction over West Ham. Along the lines of "All Premiershit teams must abide by the rules of the FA and FIFA at all times or face playing Bristol Rovers on a regular basis" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fordy62 Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 Talksport is so transparent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonBristolian Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 One of the people on TalkSport had his facts completely wrong. Big Sam didn't play him on Saturday 'cos he had been advised not play him until the outcome of the FIFA investigation - not 'cos he was injured again... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhistleHappy Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=js7T-VTL91k Loving this.. What a balls-up .. The gift that keeps giving and taking and giving and taking.. Where's it all gonna end?.. Good fun though, we might benefit somewhere along the line (which would be nice) but if nothing changes then we'll be back to where we were when the ref blew full time in the game itself - although we lost we were reasonably happy then. So, maybe we're in with a shout of getting a lucky unexpected bonus but.. if we don't ...we should still be as happy as we were before this blew up.. Anyway, just enjoy the debate, are there any more twists in this tale? Unexpectedly going on and on... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slartibartfast Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 Disgrace, what happened to "the profits from criminality"? I wouldn't give two hoots had they been found innocent, BUT now they are guilty what are the FA going to do? What a (further) tainted competion this has become. How comes "little" MK & Cheatersfield had to replay for a minor offence, "big bad" Wham don't have to do FA ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fodbarmyarmy Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 How can a fine be less than the profit made by cheating? Just don't make sense.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Southport Red Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 I suspect this will be another example of the difference between law and justice: The laws will say that WHU broke FIFA rules but not FA ones. They player was correctly registered to them and therefore, as far as the FA Cup is concerned, there is no wrongdoing and therefore nothing to punish and no claim for compensation. Justice would take into account we were just 10 minutes from a VERY lucrative replay when someone who should have been elsewhere scored the only goal and so denied us said replay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 It is amazing that there is no statement from the FA, this is their premier competition and it is turning into a laughing stock. On the basis that PL teams can do what they like, perhaps Suarez will turn out for Liverpool tonight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frenchay Red Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 Lifted directly from KUMB, whether it's accurate or not I don't know, but what a farce this is turning into! "there is no provision for a fine in the FIFA rules, points deducted and removed from Cup that is all there is in the rule, no fine at all." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dogbert Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 Lifted directly from KUMB, whether it's accurate or not I don't know, but what a farce this is turning into! "there is no provision for a fine in the FIFA rules, points deducted and removed from Cup that is all there is in the rule, no fine at all."No that only relates to if they deliberately withheld him from the competition. They have been found guilty of not making him sit out the competition for which a fine is possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frenchay Red Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 Dogbert, on 04 Feb 2015 - 4:47 PM, said: No that only relates to if they deliberately withheld him from the competition. They have been found guilty of not making him sit out the competition for which a fine is possible. Ok thanks, may be you should register on KUMB and put them straight! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simon uk Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 By telling senegal he was injured but then playing him, is that not deliberately withdrawing him from the afcon? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bakes Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 Goughie could be a politician, not answering the question just keeps repeating himself, sounds like a clown. What happens to Bristol City? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dogbert Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 By telling senegal he was injured but then playing him, is that not deliberately withdrawing him from the afcon?I think everyone (FIFA/Senegal) accepted that he was genuinely injured and so couldn't go and play at AFCON - but at that point the rules state that he has to sit out the duration of his team being in the tournament. So it was just by playing him during that period that they broke the rules.If FIFA had decided that the injury was made up then they'd have had them chucked them out of the FA Cup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admin Ian M Posted February 4, 2015 Admin Share Posted February 4, 2015 Ignorance is no defence. I think the club will seek clarification of the FA's position on this given Chesterfield were forced to replay for a loan player they only had verbal permission to play. Once the FA confirm West Ham are a PL team so cannot be kicked out for rulebreaking we will seek compensation through the civil courts given their guilt has been established by the world's governing body. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
North London Red Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 What if West Ham voluntarily offer us a replay at Upton Park (a suggestion that's been made on KUMB)? There is a precedent for a team voluntarily offering a replay (Arsenal against Sheffield United a few years ago). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Numero Uno Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 No, just give us the cash we would have made from a replay and let us get on with getting promotion!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
exiledinwatford Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 Bet Man City are kicking themselves for not bringing back Toure and Bony and getting them in against Chelsea last weekend. It's only money and a slap on the wrists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Scotty Murray Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 This is all around good news. We were not that bothered about going through anyway and it looks like we could claim for significant compensation. Everyone is a winner. I am personally quite glad they did this! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Northski Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 If I was a WH Utd board member, I'd probably be picking up the phone to Steve Lansdown and offering him something pretty special right now. City are in the right, WHU have been found in the wrong and been given more money than they've been fined and i imagine WHU don't want bother and will pay us to go away. If they can throw money at flying their team down from London, them they can give us a darn great wad of cash for us to go away. Or risk City taking further action S Lansdown has got very deep pockets and could be very dangerous to West Ham right now. Plus + They could offer to pay for Oskar's entire operation, and fly him over to the States in the plane they used to get to Ashton Gate. Might buy them a few brownie points Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CotswoldRed Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark43 Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 Don't really care from our point of view, didn't want a replay and although compensation would be nice I don't see it as a massive thing. However I'm annoyed at such a ridiculously lenient punishment, it really does send out the wrong signal and tell big teams they can just carry on doing whatever they like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 If I was a WH Utd board member, I'd probably be picking up the phone to Steve Lansdown and offering him something pretty special right now. City are in the right, WHU have been found in the wrong and been given more money than they've been fined and i imagine WHU don't want bother and will pay us to go away. If they can throw money at flying their team down from London, them they can give us a darn great wad of cash for us to go away. Or risk City taking further action S Lansdown has got very deep pockets and could be very dangerous to West Ham right now. Plus + They could offer to pay for Oskar's entire operation, and fly him over to the States in the plane they used to get to Ashton Gate. Might buy them a few brownie points Maybe Karen Brady might offer SL a place on next years Apprentice, that Nick guy has packed it in I remember. Perfect for SL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jesus Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 This is what everyone wanted!!!!!!!!!!! I swear this forum should be for people with Bipolar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redcityman Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 This is what everyone wanted!!!!!!!!!!! I swear this forum should be for people with Bipolar Everyone! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cityexile Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 If one can put aside the sense of injustice from a nonsense FIFA decision, I feel we will have little actual recourse here. From a domestic, FA, of view, he is clearly an eligible player. No domestic rule was broken The rule broken was with FIFA. They have made their decision. Like it or not, that is the way it is. All the FA will say is none of their rules are broken, and the ultimate governing body has made a decision on a fit and proper punishmenr for their rule that was broken. If we have any recourse at all, it is actually with FIFA for a perverse decision. Good luck with that! Lets remember how we all felt when the final whistle went. Happy enough. Leaves a very sour taste to be honest, but what is in our interest right now is to move on and put this behind us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Esmond Million's Bung Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 This is what everyone wanted!!!!!!!!!!! I swear this forum should be for people with Bipolar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jesus Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 Everyone! A high percentage then, if we're being pedantic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admin phantom Posted February 4, 2015 Admin Share Posted February 4, 2015 I wonder how many people would change their opinion if it was a trip to Arsenal/Man Utd and not West Brom? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Northski Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 A high percentage then, if we're being pedantic. We all are. That's why we're on here in the day time. and how come you drink in the bath anyway? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
exiledinwatford Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 Strange decision by FIFA. Maybe they don't care whether players are released or stay away from international tournaments with mysterious injuries. Don't bank on seeing Bale play for Wales or Ronaldo being released for Portuguese qualifiers. Come on the baggies! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aaron-Bcfc Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 I wonder how many people would change their opinion if it was a trip to Arsenal/Man Utd and not West Brom? I think West Brom is a pretty appealing tie to be honest. Premier League, good ground and relatively close. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cityexile Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 Don't really care from our point of view, didn't want a replay and although compensation would be nice I don't see it as a massive thing. However I'm annoyed at such a ridiculously lenient punishment, it really does send out the wrong signal and tell big teams they can just carry on doing whatever they like. I suspect I might get slammed a bit for this, but here goes. I always felt whilst Senagol had a strong moral case, their legal claim was very weak. Sakho was called up to the provisional squad. Everyone agrees he then got injured. He was then flown home, and West Ham then advised he would be injured for three to six weeks. On the basis of this, he was not called up to the competition squad. Three weeks later he was fit enough to play for ten minutes. There is no doubt if he had actually been called up West Ham could not have played him without being thrown out of the cup. If that had happened in this case, I have no doubt W Ham would seek legal recourse under their rules. This is a typical political FIFA fudge. O dear. Not much we can do here chaps, how do we get out of this one whilst looking supportive to Senagol? O, I know, lets say they broke the rules, but impose a trivial fine that deep down they will be happy with and do nothing about. Sorted. But Gov? Will this not look like being unfair on Bristol City? O, haha, they are not even a premier league side, as you were. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhistleHappy Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 If I was a WH Utd board member, I'd probably be picking up the phone to Steve Lansdown and offering him something pretty special right now. City are in the right, WHU have been found in the wrong and been given more money than they've been fined and i imagine WHU don't want bother and will pay us to go away. If they can throw money at flying their team down from London, them they can give us a darn great wad of cash for us to go away. Or risk City taking further action S Lansdown has got very deep pockets and could be very dangerous to West Ham right now. Plus + They could offer to pay for Oskar's entire operation, and fly him over to the States in the plane they used to get to Ashton Gate. Might buy them a few brownie points The least they can do for cheating us out of our Valentines Day FA Cup chances would be for WHams owners to pull a few rabbits out of their hat and give City fans a chance to enjoy a decent Valentines Night instead. Send City some AnnSummers vouchers to distribute to our ST holders.. (Rabbits out of hats ..pun ) If they won't even do that much for us they can shove their love toys where the sun don't shine.. So Karren ( have a word with the boss ) and on the 14th it could be Up Ours so to speak instead of.... Up Yours Karren and yer cheating cockney bubble blowing club. (and don't forget to include battery's!) Reckon AS vouchers would be preferable to non existant 'food vouchers' anyway! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Red Rich Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 If one can put aside the sense of injustice from a nonsense FIFA decision, I feel we will have little actual recourse here. From a domestic, FA, of view, he is clearly an eligible player. No domestic rule was broken The rule broken was with FIFA. They have made their decision. Like it or not, that is the way it is. All the FA will say is none of their rules are broken, and the ultimate governing body has made a decision on a fit and proper punishme for their rule that was broken. If we have any rcourse at all, it is actually with FIFA for a perverse decision. Good luck with that! Lets remember how we all felt when the final whistle went. Happy enough. Leaves a very sour taste to be honest, but what is in our interest right now is to move on and put this behind us. Great post, agree 100% when you put it like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhistleHappy Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 This is what everyone wanted!!!!!!!!!!! I swear this forum should be for people with Bipolar ..but sexist, some of us are straight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bernie from barrow gurney Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 i do wonder if the FA are considering some further punishment for West Ham. As it cannot sit well with them that a Club has made a profit out of a match in their competition, after being guilty of fielding an illegible player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cityexile Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
22A Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 i do wonder if the FA are considering some further punishment for West Ham. As it cannot sit well with them that a Club has made a profit out of a match in their competition, after being guilty of fielding an illegible player. Think back to the Tevez affair. By being allowed to stay in the Prem, West Ham made more money than they were fined for fielding an ineligible player. "Word on the street" back then was that the Premiership bosses thought WHU were going down anyway, so simply fined them. If a points deduction had been imposed that would have guaranteed relegation, then WHU would have taken the case to court. After all WHU are "a big club" and it was "only" Sheff U who went down instead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 FIFA passing the buck, no suprise there. Who will City be playing next Tuesday Port Vale or West Ham? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reddevon Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 I suspect I might get slammed a bit for this, but here goes. I always felt whilst Senagol had a strong moral case, their legal claim was very weak. Sakho was called up to the provisional squad. Everyone agrees he then got injured. He was then flown home, and West Ham then advised he would be injured for three to six weeks.On the basis of this, he was not called up to the competition squad. Three weeks later he was fit enough to play for ten minutes.There is no doubt if he had actually been called up West Ham could not have played him without being thrown out of the cup. If that had happened in this case, I have no doubt W Ham would seek legal recourse under their rules. This is a typical political FIFA fudge. O dear. Not much we can do here chaps, how do we get out of this one whilst looking supportive to Senagol? O, I know, lets say they broke the rules, but impose a trivial fine that deep down they will be happy with and do nothing about. Sorted. But Gov? Will this not look like being unfair on Bristol City? O, haha, they are not even a premier league side, as you were. Sorry Exile but he was called up on 5/1 along with Mane of Southampton who also was injured. Mane joined the squad and recovered and played. Saakho (did not recover) but played against us ,when WHU knew the rules, and have been found guilty by FIFA. The only problem is there is nothing in th FA rules which link to the FIFA rule. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dogbert Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 I always felt whilst Senagol had a strong moral case, their legal claim was very weak. Sakho was called up to the provisional squad. Everyone agrees he then got injured. He was then flown home, and West Ham then advised he would be injured for three to six weeks. On the basis of this, he was not called up to the competition squad. Three weeks later he was fit enough to play for ten minutes. There is no doubt if he had actually been called up West Ham could not have played him without being thrown out of the cup. If that had happened in this case, I have no doubt W Ham would seek legal recourse under their rules. Thing is that he was in the provisional squad of 28, then got called up to the final squad of 23 on January 5th (http://www.fifa.com/world-match-centre/news/newsid/250/000/6/) at which point he pulled out due to injury and was replaced. Therefore he was called up for Senegal and not allowed to play. After that WH claim that as he wasn't in the final final squad then that didn't count (http://www.espnfc.com/african-nations-cup/story/2234996/west-ham-insist-diafra-sakho-is-injuredhit-back-at-senegal-claims) and that should he be fit again they would take advice on whether he could play. Presumably they didn't think to take advice from FIFA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samo II Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 Suspected West Ham might have got it pretty easy. But as others have mention; it is what has not happened yet that is interesting. The FA have basically been told by FIFA that they have latitude to punish West Ham further, and I strongly suspect that is more of a nudge that not. The MK Dons/Chesterfield scenario may not be exactly the same, but it set a president in that the integrity of the competition is paramount; they could of fined MK but instead made the teams play an unwanted replay. Suspect that may end up happening here, in all honesty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cityexile Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 Thing is that he was in the provisional squad of 28, then got called up to the final squad of 23 on January 5th (http://www.fifa.com/world-match-centre/news/newsid/250/000/6/) at which point he pulled out due to injury and was replaced. Therefore he was called up for Senegal and not allowed to play. After that WH claim that as he wasn't in the final final squad then that didn't count (http://www.espnfc.com/african-nations-cup/story/2234996/west-ham-insist-diafra-sakho-is-injuredhit-back-at-senegal-claims) and that should he be fit again they would take advice on whether he could play. Presumably they didn't think to take advice from FIFA. Ok, an important difference I agree. In which case they really should have been removed? There is part of me that simply says they have been found guilty of playing an ineligible player against us, and are up on the deal. Another part just as strongly just wants to move on! I sm sure the FA will find some way to protect the team that won the world cup from any fall out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
red mist Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 I wonder what the outcome would have been if the said player was with BCFC, came off the bench and knocked out WHU? How week is the football league and the FA over this. The Premier League wins again. We are getting to the stage when the Premier League will be a franchise. Come on FA there are other clubs who are members and do not break the rules Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reddevon Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 Suspected West Ham might have got it pretty easy. But as others have mention; it is what has not happened yet that is interesting. The FA have basically been told by FIFA that they have latitude to punish West Ham further, and I strongly suspect that is more of a nudge that not. The MK Dons/Chesterfield scenario may not be exactly the same, but it set a president in that the integrity of the competition is paramount; they could of fined MK but instead made the teams play an unwanted replay. Suspect that may end up happening here, in all honesty. Problem is Samo is that THE MKD/Chesterfield scenario is in the FA rules but FIFA have passed the buck to the FA knowing there is nothing in the FA rules to punish WHU with, making the FA look d*cks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhistleHappy Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 The least they can do for cheating us out of our Valentines Day FA Cup chances would be for WHams owners to pull a few rabbits out of their hat and give City fans a chance to enjoy a decent Valentines Night instead. Send City some AnnSummers vouchers to distribute to our ST holders.. (Rabbits out of hats ..pun ) If they won't even do that much for us they can shove their love toys where the sun don't shine.. So Karren ( have a word with the boss ) and on the 14th it could be Up Ours so to speak instead of.... Up Yours Karren and yer cheating cockney bubble blowing club. (and don't forget to include battery's!) Reckon AS vouchers would be preferable to non existant 'food vouchers' anyway! Nobody getting good vibes for this idea then? I thought you'd all be buzzing by now tbh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 Without reading through every post to check if this has been mentioned, my wife asked what the outcome would be if WHU had scored a late winner at MUFC. Different outcome, I'm sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samo II Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 Problem is Samo is that THE MKD/Chesterfield scenario is in the FA rules but FIFA have passed the buck to the FA knowing there is nothing in the FA rules to punish WHU with, making the FA look d*cks. They could have requested they sling West Ham out, but chose not to; I think that might be a face saving measure in case the FA decide to take a different road. My personal position is that this devalues the cup; it says that clubs can break the rules, drop a little coin (despite still profiting, of course) and then progress. Imagine if West Ham went on to win it; what would that say about the integrity of the competition? After such an exciting round (one of the most shocking for decades), following it with this stinks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashtonboy Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 Without reading through every post to check if this has been mentioned, my wife asked what the outcome would be if WHU had scored a late winner at MUFC. Different outcome, I'm sure. No, they would still have won 1-0. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slack Bladder Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 Let's just walk away with our heads held high. This cup run is tarnished for WHU, everyone knows what they are like for bending rules on players. I don't want the club to makes fools of themselves like the blue few. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 FA, pull your finger out and put this one to bed. We can then move on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reddevon Posted February 4, 2015 Share Posted February 4, 2015 I've changed my mind after sifting through the Rules of Association 2014/15 of the FA Under Rule (F) - page120 - POWERS OF INQUIRY OF THE ASSOCIATION 1 The Association shall have the power to monitor the compliance by each Participant with the Rules, the Laws of the Game, the statutes and regulations of FIFA and UEFA and the rules and regulations of each Affiliated Association and Competition to which a Participant is subject and/or inquire into any incident, facts or matters which may constitute misconduct under these Rules. It is for The Association to determine in its absolute discretion the manner in which it conducts an inquiry. 2 In carrying out its functions under Rule F1, The Association shall have the power to require of any Participant upon reasonable notice: (a) his or her attendance to answer questions and provide information at a time and place determined by The Association; and (b) the provision to The Association of documents, information or any other material of any nature held by the Participant; and © the procurement and provision to The Association of documents, information or any other material of any nature not held by the Participant but which the Participant has the power to obtain. It is for The Association to determine the nature and extent of any material required for disclosure in accordance with (b) or ©. Where a Participant is interviewed by The Association pursuant to sub-paragraph (a) above, such interview may be recorded by any method determined by The Association in its absolute discretion to be appropriate, including tape-recording. A copy of any such recording shall be provided to the Participant as soon as practicable after the interview. 3 Any failure by a Participant to comply with any requirement under Rule F2 may constitute Misconduct under the Rules and The Association may bring a charge or such charges as it sees fit. Also INTEGRITY MATTERS IN RELATION TO MATCHES AND COMPETITIONS 5 (a) A Participant shall not, directly or indirectly, seek to influence for an improper purpose the result, progress, conduct or any other aspect of, or occurrence in, a football match or competition. I'm sure Steve's lawyers are onto it and we will see a victory over that evil lot from Upton Park! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.png.2ed242d5ea5b344992e9427ccf6b0309.png)
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.