Sheff Weds - 6 loan players in match squad !!!

[GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary 1,735]

Sorry if i''m nicking this off another thread - but I think it''s worthy of it''s own post......

Sheffield Wednesday

	Cards	Rating
Lee Grant
Richard Hinds *
Tommy Spurr
Richard Wood
Mark Beevers
Graham Kavanagh
Wade Small **
Sean McAllister
Deon Burton
Ben Sahar ***
Franck Songo''o
Substitutes
Steve Craig Watson (17) *
Adam Bolder
Jermaine Johnson (65) **
Enoch Showunmi (79) ***
Bartosz Slusarski

Stoke City

	Cards	Rating
Carlo Nash
Andy Griffin
Chris Riggott
Leon Cort
Carl Dickinson
Rory Delap
Liam Lawrence
Glenn Whelan
Stephen Pearson *
Richard Cresswell
Shola Ameobi **
Substitutes
Steve Simonsen
Lewis Buxton
Danny Pugh (78) **
Andy Wilkinson
Jay Bothroyd (72

 

By my reckoning - Kavanagh (Sunderland),Sahar (Chelsea), Songo''o (Portsmouth),Bolder (Q.P.R),Showunmi (Bristol C) & Slusarski (W.B.A.) are all on loan - thats 6 in the match sqaud of 16 - DOCK THEIR POINTS !!!!!!!!

[DDD In The Fine City 1]

Thought they signed Kavanagh in jan full time?

[Guest]

Leeds got fined 2k for doing this last year, but the difference here is all six played, so hopefully Sheff Weds will be in a bit of a trouble for it! Doubtful they will be punished too severely though.

[NCFC_Shaun 0]

[quote] user="Patrick Boyle''s Toenail Clippings"]Leeds got fined 2k for doing this last year, but the difference here is all six played, so hopefully Sheff Weds will be in a bit of a trouble for it! Doubtful they will be punished too severely though.
[/quote]

 

well they should be .. or other teams will just think they can go to that without to many consequences ... like us!

[sam 0]

Oh, i see Daniel, now you are relying on other teams to get fined and lose points, typical.

[Guest]

[quote user="sam"]Oh, i see Daniel, now you are relying on other teams to get fined and lose points, typical.[/quote]

You take any luck you can get Samuel. Although the chances of them being docked points are nearly as good as the chances of Leeds getting promoted, I''d say.

[Canary Addiction 0]

FAO: Delia''s Devonshire Dirtbox

Kavanagh''s loan was extended in Jan.

For confirmation he is on loan check Wednesday''s web site:

http://www.swfc.premiumtv.co.uk/page/ProfilesDetail/0,,10304,00.html

I bet they just get a ''fine'', as in, "you look fine Sheff Wed, carry on breaking the laws of the game."

[Trent Canary 0]

[quote user="sam"]Oh, i see Daniel, now you are relying on other teams to get fined and lose points, typical.[/quote]

No ones relying on anything. If you break the rules you get punished, if we had done the same thing I would expect us to be punished.

[Guest]

[quote user="Patrick Boyles Toenail Clippings"]but the difference here is all six played[/quote]I realise I''m wrong here, only four played a part.

[GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary 1,735]

How many of these loan players actually played and how many were unused is surely irrellevant.

The fact is by having 6 in the squad of 16 means that they had presumably better cover for all situations and circumstances during the game. If they had only picked the 5 which they were allowed maybe one of these substitutes which came off the bench to help them get a point wouldn''t have been sitting on there in the first place !

[NCFC_Shaun 0]

[quote][user="Patrick Boyle''s Toenail Clippings"][quote user="Patrick Boyles Toenail Clippings"]but the difference here is all six played[/quote]

I realise I''m wrong here, only four played a part.
[/quote]

 

so the F.A should still do something about it. Will be pathetic if they dont...

[NegativeVibes 0]

[quote user="GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary"]

How many of these loan players actually played and how many were unused is surely irrellevant.

The fact is by having 6 in the squad of 16 means that they had presumably better cover for all situations and circumstances during the game. If they had only picked the 5 which they were allowed maybe one of these substitutes which came off the bench to help them get a point wouldn''t have been sitting on there in the first place !

[/quote]

Completely agree. If little action is taken then it just encourages more teams to do the same. Although no doubt there will be more of a severe punishment for the second team that does it.

[Guest]

[quote user="ipswichrscum"]

[quoteuser="Patrick Boyles Toenail Clippings"][quote user="Patrick Boyles Toenail Clippings"]but the difference here is all six played[/quote]I realise I''m wrong here, only four played a part.[/quote]

so the F.A should still do something about it. Will be pathetic if they dont...

[/quote]I''m not excusing them, the F.A. should and will do something about it, just what they will do is the question. The fact Sheff Wed got a point from the game and one of the loanees scored, plus clubs have been warned about this rule recently, all might work against them.Because only four played doesn''t make a difference, they still broke the rule having six in the squad, I was just correcting my mistake.

[Guest]

I''ve probably just contradicted my first post horribly. Ah well.

[Saint Canary 0]

Stoke have lodged a complaint.

http://football.guardian.co.uk/News_Story/0,,2269524,00.html

[whoareyou? 0]

Do you think maybe Sheffield did this delibarately knowing the worst they will get is a £1000 fine?

[Branston Pickle 3,632]

If it is indeed true that the Owls have broken the rules, then they should be punished - it is clear that it gained them an advantage, particularly as one of their loan players scored the equaliser.  Stoke can quite rightly feel cheated and if they do complain the sides around Sheff Weds should also do so pronto - we have been juggling our squad since January to keep within the rules, so why shouldn''t others have to do the same?

[Citizen Journalist Foghorn 0]

[quote user="whoareyou"]Do you think maybe Sheffield did this delibarately knowing the worst they will get is a £1000 fine?[/quote]#

That is a dreadful article from the Guardian....  Lazy journalism about a league they couldnt care less about.

 

Here is Archant''s version finally: http://www.eveningnews24.co.uk/content/Sport/story.aspx?brand=ENOnline&category=Sport&tBrand=ENOnline&tCategory=Sport&itemid=NOED31%20Mar%202008%2010%3A42%3A38%3A880

and in yorkshire:  http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/sport/BREAKING-Owls-could-face-points.3928834.jp

[Citizen Journalist Foghorn 0]

IMO
the rule should be to apply a 3 point deduction. The other team should then be able to replay the game if they want.

[Saint Canary 0]

[quote user="Branston Pickle"]

If it is indeed true that the Owls have broken the rules, then they should be punished - it is clear that it gained them an advantage, particularly as one of their loan players scored the equaliser.  Stoke can quite rightly feel cheated and if they do complain the sides around Sheff Weds should also do so pronto - we have been juggling our squad since January to keep within the rules, so why shouldn''t others have to do the same?

[/quote]

Agree with that.  All the clubs should complain.

We have juggled to stay within the rules and the fact the even us mere fans know the rule it goes to show that this can be nothing but deliberate by Sheffield Wednesday.  I just cannot stretch my belief far enough that not one person at Wednesday did not know the rules or can''t count to 6. 

This is nothing short of deliberate and a points deduction (if only the 1 from Saturday) should be enforced!  What if they were to stay up at the expense of another side by 1 point or goal difference?  What if it''s us going there on the last day of season just 2 points from safety?

[Hardhouse44 261]

If they don''t punish them then we should do the same. What’s to stop us and anybody else fielding 6 loan player is the squad. In fact if they don''t punish them I think we should do it as should all other teams in the position to do so. These rules are there and should be adhered too. Otherwise why bother having rules.Is the referee not also culpable. He should surely be made aware of the loan players within the teams that he is refereeing and not have allowed the game to start until Sheffield Wed submitted a team sheet that complied with the current rules on loan players. Yet another total balls up by the powers that be in football.

[Shack Attack 0]

[quote user="Citizen Journalist Foghorn"]

That is a dreadful article from the Guardian....  Lazy journalism about a league they couldnt care less about.

Here is Archant''s version finally: http://www.eveningnews24.co.uk/content/Sport/story.aspx?brand=ENOnline&category=Sport&tBrand=ENOnline&tCategory=Sport&itemid=NOED31%20Mar%202008%2010%3A42%3A38%3A880

[/quote]

They''re virtually the same apart from the Evening News giving it a Norwich slant, which you would expect.

First Waggers, now The Guardian. Were you kicked out of journalism college when you were younger by any chance [:P] .

[SWP = Poor Mans Ruel Fox!! 0]

They should have the point gained from Saturdays match taken away, and Stoke will be given the three points I imagine, otherwise there would be some major whinging going on at other clubs.

Without looking back, I wonder whether when Leeds played too many loan players they lost anyway, hence they just got a fine??

[shefcanary 2,383]

THe Sheffield Star is taking it very low key up here.  They have quoted the Club as saying they do expect a fine of around £1,000, but no points deduction is being mentioned.  If another Sheffield club got relegated through a decision reached off the field (remember United and the Tevez affair last season) then I think all hell would break loose up here in the Birthplace of Association Football. 

From a Norwich perspective let''s do it on the pitch!

[Citizen Journalist Foghorn 0]

[quote user="Shack Attack"][quote user="Citizen Journalist Foghorn"]

That is a dreadful article from the Guardian....  Lazy journalism about a league they couldnt care less about.

Here is Archant''s version finally: http://www.eveningnews24.co.uk/content/Sport/story.aspx?brand=ENOnline&category=Sport&tBrand=ENOnline&tCategory=Sport
&itemid=NOED31%20Mar%202008%2010%3A42%3A38%3A880

[/quote]

They''re virtually the same apart from the Evening News giving it a Norwich slant, which you would expect.

First Waggers, now The Guardian. Were you kicked out of journalism college when you were younger by any chance [:P] .

[/quote]

Both articles fail to mention that Leeds lost the game in question and are equally crap. 

Had Sheffield Wednesday won what would you do?  Just a fine?  They gained aan unfair (cheating) advantage over Stoke in this game.

[Citizen Journalist Foghorn 0]

[quote user="shefcanary"]

THe Sheffield Star is taking it very low key up here.  They have quoted the Club as saying they do expect a fine of around £1,000, but no points deduction is being mentioned.  If another Sheffield club got relegated through a decision reached off the field (remember United and the Tevez affair last season) then I think all hell would break loose up here in the Birthplace of Association Football. 

From a Norwich perspective let''s do it on the pitch!

[/quote]

From a Norwich Perspective, lets gain fair advantage by helping get a cheating side to be given there fair dues of a points deduction.....  I would be furious if I was Stoke - Wednesday Cheated them out of possibly 3 points as a player who may not have been picked in the squad scored the goal!!

The FA are culpable as usual. The 6th player is surely ''INELIGIBLE''

By issueing only a fine to Leeds surely this opens the possibility of a £2000 charge to have a greater choice of substitutes? I still think a 3 point penalty for cheating and the opportunity for the opposition to replay the game is the fairest decision in these cases.

6.4.6 [The maximum number of Short Term Loans will be 8 per Season and Long Term Loans will
be 2 per Season. Whilst a Club may register any number of Work Experience players only
2 may play in any one match in accordance with FA Rules. A Club may name up to a
maximum of 5 players on a team sheet who are either Long Term Loans, Short Term Loans
or Work Experience players with no more than 2 from any one Category.]

6.8 PLAYING AN INELIGIBLE PLAYER
Any Club found to have played an ineligible player in a match shall have any points gained
from that match deducted from its record and have levied upon it a fine in accordance with
the Fines Tariff. The Company may vary this decision in respect of the points gained only
in circumstances where the ineligibility is due to the failure to obtain an International
Transfer Certificate or in the case of where a substitute player who is ineligible participates
in a match or is listed on the official team sheet but does not participate in that match.
The Board may also order that such match be replayed on such terms as are decided by the
Board which may also levy penalty points against the Club in default.

 

 

[we8wba 0]

you cant dock them points for crying out loud

fine is expected i would say

[Hardhouse44 261]

[quote user="we8wba"]

you cant dock them points for crying out loud

fine is expected i would say

[/quote]Why not? They have gained an unfair advantage and a point by fielding players that they should not have included in the squad. At the very least the point they gained has to be deducted. Any fine would be nominal, they are not a rich club. You can''t get blood out of stone. It also open up the whole thing to massive abuse. Clubs could theoretically field a whole team of loanees to win a match which might gain them promotion or save their league status. Any fine would be proportionate to that of Sheff Weds and therefore would be will worth paying if you guarantee you survival or promotion.

[USAcanary 0]

[quote user="we8wba"]

you cant dock them points for crying out loud

fine is expected i would say

[/quote]

Are you crazy?

If the FA just fines them then other clubs will deliberately play loan players when they are desperate for points knowing that promotion/relegation is worth more than the fine.

If they just fine they will open up a huge can of worms.

How thick are the people at Shef Wed that not one person came up with the fact they have 6 loans in the matchday squad.

[Syteanric 1]

[quote user="we8wba"]

you cant dock them points for crying out loud

 

[/quote]

why?

they have cheated.

jas :)