Points deduction

A-Ro · Post by **A-Ro** » Mon Jan 12, 2009 12:09 pm

&quotPeña Oxford United&quot wrote:
&quotA-Ro&quot wrote:Is it really that cold in Spain?
Except in the Canaries, yes. Snow practically everywhere (though not actually where I am, or not yet).

I'm going to Seville the first week of February, should I take a coat and scarf?

Pe├▒a Oxford United · Mon Jan 12, 2009 12:32 pm

To be honest, if I could do long-range weather forecasts for parts of Spain in which I do not live, I'd probably be famous...

Pe├▒a Oxford United · Mon Jan 12, 2009 12:38 pm

Meanwhile, I read this:

Season ticket holder James Wall, 24, from Bicester, dismissed calls for Mr Brown’s resignation as “stupid

Mooro · Post by **Mooro** » Mon Jan 12, 2009 1:13 pm

Unless we have some pretty strong proof of not only delivery but acknowledgement then I doubt we have much chance of escaping the penalty mentioned, it amuses me that some people (especially on TIU) think that because it is a big club like Oxford/ or that Mick Brown is on the Conference board, means we have more chance of getting away with it – I’d actually suspect the opposite.

I also doubt we will get any judgement except the eleven point fine, as that is calculated in the same way as everyone else’s penalty has been and there is no reason why we should be any exception. Other clubs have made similar, if not lesser, slipups and been penalised more.

Each has stamped their feet, cried foul and unfair, and demands a change to the process, but gets little or no support from their fellow clubs (who are just happy to move up a place in the table) other than the occasional sympathetic word, and nothing gets done, nor will it after today’s hearing. If AFC Wimbledon cannot get it changed, then we wont!

The problem is that the penalty does not fit the crime, in that while there may be some logic in losing all points gained, this does not take account that in most cases the fault is a single innocent oversight/miscommunication rather than a deliberate attempt to deceive. The only difference between a club being fined 4pts (Mansfield), 11pts (Us) , 18pts (AFC Wimbledon*) is how quickly any error is picked up, and given that there are little or no checking processes at the authorities, this can take longer in some cases than others, which results in vastly differing penalties for ostensibly the same mistake. What if a problem is picked up in March with near ever-presents like Constable or Murray?

It is unrealistic to expect the FA to have a foolproof registration monitoring system up and running any time soon (no I rephrase that, it is realistic to expect it, just unrealistic to think that it will actually happen), so in the meantime a simpler penalty system of 3 pts per ‘crime’, regardless of how long it takes to come to light, (as long as it is not deemed as a deliberate act of deceipt) would be fairer, but even calls for this in recent years have gone unheeded, so I’m afraid we cannot expect any other outcome than that suggested.

* - their crime – while they sent in the registration form correctly upon signing a player from Cardiff, they failed to attach an additional form to transfer a registration from a different national FA, having presumed that they did not need to due to signing a player from a club in the same pyramid than themselves. The error only came to light when after a dozen or more games and 18 points gained, the player picked up a yellow card

Anyway, it is probably decided by now, so…

Jimski · Post by **Jimski** » Mon Jan 12, 2009 1:23 pm

AFC Wimbledon are probably not a good example, because they had their penalty reduced to 3 points in the end. It was a different situation to ours though.

Mally · Post by **Mally** » Mon Jan 12, 2009 1:29 pm

When was the last time a league side had a similar penalty imposed? I certainly can't ever recall it happening at the Premier League or Championship level. Is this because nobody ever makes an error at that level or because they have better lawyers and deeper pockets to threaten the FA with if they do? Surely with all the complex international transfers and payments that go on at that level you would think there was a lot more scope for making an error. I know they spend a lot more time and money to ensure iot doesn't happen but it must happen sometimes.

A-Ro · Post by **A-Ro** » Mon Jan 12, 2009 1:35 pm

&quotMally&quot wrote:When was the last time a league side had a similar penalty imposed? I certainly can't ever recall it happening at the Premier League or Championship level. Is this because nobody ever makes an error at that level or because they have better lawyers and deeper pockets to threaten the FA with if they do? Surely with all the complex international transfers and payments that go on at that level you would think there was a lot more scope for making an error. I know they spend a lot more time and money to ensure iot doesn't happen but it must happen sometimes.

Wouldn't the Tevez incident normally have attracted a points deduction?

Mally · Post by **Mally** » Mon Jan 12, 2009 2:03 pm

&quotA-Ro&quot wrote:
&quotMally&quot wrote:When was the last time a league side had a similar penalty imposed? I certainly can't ever recall it happening at the Premier League or Championship level. Is this because nobody ever makes an error at that level or because they have better lawyers and deeper pockets to threaten the FA with if they do? Surely with all the complex international transfers and payments that go on at that level you would think there was a lot more scope for making an error. I know they spend a lot more time and money to ensure iot doesn't happen but it must happen sometimes.
Wouldn't the Tevez incident normally have attracted a points deduction?

My point exactly. I know we are non league and deserve to be but that's no reason to accept the fact that it's a tin pot league run like a local sunday pub league.

Dr Bob · Post by **Dr Bob** » Mon Jan 12, 2009 2:19 pm

&quotPeña Oxford United&quot wrote:Another thing bugging me....this business about &quothaving known since November&quot. Does it normally take two months for this sort of thing to arrive at a hearing? If not, why in this instance?

Quite - to which I would add, why did it take until November to come to light? Mansfield had fewer matches affected and points deducted, as well as more matches to try to make them up (albeit largely unsuccessfully).

Pe├▒a Oxford United · Mon Jan 12, 2009 2:38 pm

Anyway, perhaps I shall set up a Facebook group entitled I Am Not Supporting Oxford United Again Until They Resemble A Professional Football Club And Not A Tenth-Rate Circus Act

Mooro · Post by **Mooro** » Mon Jan 12, 2009 2:46 pm

&quotDr Bob&quot wrote:
&quotPeña Oxford United&quot wrote:Another thing bugging me....this business about &quothaving known since November&quot. Does it normally take two months for this sort of thing to arrive at a hearing? If not, why in this instance?
Quite - to which I would add, why did it take until November to come to light? Mansfield had fewer matches affected and points deducted, as well as more matches to try to make them up (albeit largely unsuccessfully).

Apparently, teamsheets are only checked against registration records periodically at Conference level and below rather than every time, so I guess it is possible that with hutch in and out of the side it could have been missed for some time.

Interestingly, Bognor Regis, who are also at a hearing today, are pleading guilty to the first instance (ie. game) in which the player played, but not gulity to subsequent games on the grounds the error should have been picked up....

boris · Post by **boris** » Mon Jan 12, 2009 3:09 pm

&quotMooro&quot wrote:
Interestingly, Bognor Regis, who are also at a hearing today, are pleading guilty to the first instance (ie. game) in which the player played, but not gulity to subsequent games on the grounds the error should have been picked up....

That's an odd defence, because if they're admitting it's an error then technically they're still guilty, whether or not it should have been picked up. (Ignorance of the law, and all that.

Mooro · Post by **Mooro** » Mon Jan 12, 2009 4:14 pm

&quotboris&quot wrote:
&quotMooro&quot wrote:
Interestingly, Bognor Regis, who are also at a hearing today, are pleading guilty to the first instance (ie. game) in which the player played, but not gulity to subsequent games on the grounds the error should have been picked up....
That's an odd defence, because if they're admitting it's an error then technically they're still guilty, whether or not it should have been picked up. (Ignorance of the law, and all that.

I think they are fully aware of all that, but are just trying to make a point

Mooro · Post by **Mooro** » Mon Jan 12, 2009 4:32 pm

Text update says £500 and 5 point fine - club deciding whether to appeal....

....keeps us clear of relegation, so I suspect it might be safer not to?

A-Ro · Post by **A-Ro** » Mon Jan 12, 2009 4:41 pm

&quotMooro&quot wrote:Text update says £500 and 5 point fine - club deciding whether to appeal....

....keeps us clear of relegation, so I suspect it might be safer not to?

I have to agree with that, the Conference Forum are up in arms.

&quotConference in &quotlack of consistency&quot shocker!&quot

Rage Online

Points deduction

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re:

Re: