FA charges QPR on seven counts !!!!!!

[Baracouda 47]

Obviously the QPR fans are worried to come on here. Luton had points deduction for lots of things, but ended up being 30points, including the points for administration.

The fact, breaking the rules hasn''t affected the performance on the pitch. This is true.

However, these rules are to stop "bungs" and serious financial irregularities.

Licensed agents have to declare their accounts (apparantly) to the governing bodies to prevent the "bungs".

In the event of unlicensed agents it makes it possible for "bungs". I''m not saying that is what happened, but to make clubs use licensed agents they introduced a ten point deduction.

(my understanding only, not 100% it''s fact).

[Baracouda 47]

That been said.

QPR deserve to go up and I would like QPR to go up.

The whole situation is a joke to be fair....

I mean if he''s registered to a third party, don''t people check these things during transfers (both clubs and governing bodies).

The use of an unlicenced agent (if that is the case), isn''t this also checked at time of transfer...

begs the question, what exactly the governing bodies actually do.

Apart from waiting for clubs to break rules, not inform them at the time... wait so they can fine them.

[JustFine 0]

[quote user="Lewie - Holt Our Saviour"]When are we supposed to find out what punishment QPR will face?
[/quote]

QPR have 14 days, until this Wednesday, to respond to the FA charges. Then after considering the response the FA will set a date for a hearing.

Don''t expect to get the result until mid April. QPR will then have 14 days to appeal if they want to contest the decision.

As far as the Football League is concerned Faurlin has always been eligible to play. Faurlin''s transfer was happening  simultaneously (in July 2009) with the FA changing it''s rule to prevent third party ownership, something that is common in Argentina where he comes from. The Football League did not bring in such a rule until a year later, when Faurlin''s contracted was extended with the third party(s) bought out. It''s unlikely that anyone can claim that the purpose of the rule (control of a club by a third party) has been transgressed. The charges about unregistered agents and false documentation are less clear, but the agent on the documents was FIFA registered and later FA registered.

It seems that QPR probably hasn''t done anything that justifies a points deduction but nobody knows, not the club, the fans, the media........The betting market (eg Betfair) is not anticipating a points deduction and nor are most QPR fans, but the wait is nervy.

Good luck with your quest for automatic promotion, but not at our expense.

[qprdave 0]

if that was true we''d have been charged with fielding an ineligible player which we haven''t. He''s been fine to play all this season and all of last season, the dispute is over who we signed him from and who was paid and if we with held information from the authorities.

Faurlin was signed months before the rules were even made so it''s a bit like going back and fining Liverpool for making back passes in the 80''s and we know how the FA hate to take retrospective action when it comes to the superstars.

The Luton case was different, they were charged over several player signing and also lost points for going into administration. The Faurlin one the agent was registered by FIFA but not by the FA at that time, as the FA comes under the body of FIFA it all seems a bit of a joke to be honest and I guess it will mean Spurs lose points as well as the same agent also looks after Gareth Bale.

I wouldn''t be surprised if we do get docked points as the FA are looking to flex muscles and show they are still relevant now but to take promotion away from a club over this would seem to most sensible people to be utter madness.

[qprdave 0]

[quote user="Muddy funster"]Dave - with all due respect - I totally agree with your summation but I don''t think the majority want you to be docked points, I just think they have been told it''s a possibility. Aren''t you worried it could happen? Really? We won''t catch you I don''t think, but by trying to we may just get 2nd and go up "the old fashioned way". That''s what we all want.[/quote]

 

oh yeah of course I''m worried, no one really knows the outcome yet and you never know what the FA will do but I just think taking points off will be very unfair. The main hope I am clinging to is that Colins head would have exploded with anger if we looked in serious danger of losing points and he''s seemed quite relaxed about the whole thing. To be this close after so many years of watching absolute rubbish every week it could only be QPR where something like this comes along to ensure it was all for nothing.

 

[paul moy 235]

[quote user="Baracouda"]That been said. QPR deserve to go up and I would like QPR to go up. The whole situation is a joke to be fair.... I mean if he''s registered to a third party, don''t people check these things during transfers (both clubs and governing bodies). The use of an unlicenced agent (if that is the case), isn''t this also checked at time of transfer... begs the question, what exactly the governing bodies actually do. Apart from waiting for clubs to break rules, not inform them at the time... wait so they can fine them.[/quote]

It was QPR that failed to advise of the third party ownership and even advised their own supporters that he cost 3 million pounds or so when he clearly did not. QPR lied to the Football League, either deliberately or by omission, and lied to their own supporters also, so it appears deliberate. Surely QPR knew what they paid for their own player...... LOL.

The Football League cannot be expected to check whether QPR were telling the truth at the time as the club would have had to sign a document verifying registration/contractual matters and I would imagine any statements made by any club are taken on trust until events prove otherwise.

[Baracouda 47]

It would be a shame if QPR mis out on promotion.

Like you say, know one actually knows the circumstances.

Unauthorised agents can mean a whole ranging of terms, and such rule breaking.

If he''s registered with Fifa and not the FA, then FIFA over-rides the FA anyway, so no big deal surely that can''t be a problem, being registered with the top governing bodies as opposed one a couple levels down (fifa/uefa/english fa).

but if it''s unlicencsed in terms of some players mate, they dragged in to sign the paper work and give a bit of cash to. Then obviously that''s very severe. (not suggesting that''s the case, but obviously that''s the ultimate term for unlicensed agent).

Obviously you QPR fans know the situation a little more than us Norwich fans.

I don''t look at the table thinking ah, we top QPR is getting a points deduction.

I look at it thinking, were ahead of Swansea, and the longer that''s the case the better. Hoepfully, we can extend it to 4pts (make it Norwich or Swansea for second) and go to Swansea knowing, whatever happens we''re above them.

That being said, if I was told Norwich would go up because QPR would be dropped points for rule breaking, i''ll take it. Who wouldn''t.

However, if you club has broken the rules (severely) not just a paper work thing. Then they deserve to be punished and how Warnock treated the FA, who knows if someone has a grudge against him.

[JF 694]

If it is proved they have broke the rules they deserve a points deduction, And if we benefit from that then that''s fine by me. If they have not broke the rules they deserve to go up as champions.

[PurpleCanary 5,562]

[quote user="JustFine"]

[quote user="Lewie - Holt Our Saviour"]When are we supposed to find out what punishment QPR will face?
[/quote]

QPR have 14 days, until this Wednesday, to respond to the FA charges. Then after considering the response the FA will set a date for a hearing.

Don''t expect to get the result until mid April. QPR will then have 14 days to appeal if they want to contest the decision.

As far as the Football League is concerned Faurlin has always been eligible to play. Faurlin''s transfer was happening  simultaneously (in July 2009) with the FA changing it''s rule to prevent third party ownership, something that is common in Argentina where he comes from. The Football League did not bring in such a rule until a year later, when Faurlin''s contracted was extended with the third party(s) bought out. It''s unlikely that anyone can claim that the purpose of the rule (control of a club by a third party) has been transgressed. The charges about unregistered agents and false documentation are less clear, but the agent on the documents was FIFA registered and later FA registered.

It seems that QPR probably hasn''t done anything that justifies a points deduction but nobody knows, not the club, the fans, the media........The betting market (eg Betfair) is not anticipating a points deduction and nor are most QPR fans, but the wait is nervy.

Good luck with your quest for automatic promotion, but not at our expense.

[/quote]

---

 

I suspect that ("The club and club official Gianni Paladini are also charged in respect of allegedly false information contained in documents submitted to the FA in relation to the same player signing an extension to his playing contract with the club in October 2010.") may be the problem for QPR.

At the moment QPR seem to be saying they were honest people who got caught up in a legal tangle not of their own making and tried to solve it honestly when the League brought in their rule.

If it transpires that QPR lied (for whatever reason) in trying to sort out the legal tangle that would throw doubt on their honesty throughout the affair.

 

[Guest]

[quote user="JustFine"]

[quote user="Lewie - Holt Our Saviour"]When are we supposed to find out what punishment QPR will face?[/quote]

QPR have 14 days, until this Wednesday, to respond to the FA charges. Then after considering the response the FA will set a date for a hearing.

Don''t expect to get the result until mid April. QPR will then have 14 days to appeal if they want to contest the decision.

As far as the Football League is concerned Faurlin has always been eligible to play. Faurlin''s transfer was happening  simultaneously (in July 2009) with the FA changing it''s rule to prevent third party ownership, something that is common in Argentina where he comes from. The Football League did not bring in such a rule until a year later, when Faurlin''s contracted was extended with the third party(s) bought out. It''s unlikely that anyone can claim that the purpose of the rule (control of a club by a third party) has been transgressed. The charges about unregistered agents and false documentation are less clear, but the agent on the documents was FIFA registered and later FA registered.

It seems that QPR probably hasn''t done anything that justifies a points deduction but nobody knows, not the club, the fans, the media........The betting market (eg Betfair) is not anticipating a points deduction and nor are most QPR fans, but the wait is nervy.

Good luck with your quest for automatic promotion, but not at our expense.

[/quote]Thanks for that, it certainly gives a reasonable explanation as to why a hearing date has not yet been set. Best of luck for the rest of the season, fingers crossed the QPR fans won''t get punished at such a late stage of the season.

[norfolkchance1 0]

I always think these things should be measured on the contribution the person has made. If they have done wrong and it is proved and he has played and possibly created chances or even scored goals which have beaten teams then he won''t have just created a disadvantage for us and the promotion chasing teams it will have affected the other end of the table as well.

[paul moy 235]

[quote user="qprdave"]

Faurlin has never been ineligible to play, that''s not what we are being charged with. The Football league cleared the transfer in 2009 and cleared the contract renewal last year, if he had been ineligible to play then the FA would have stopped him playing a long time ago.

It''s the third party ownership which is a problem and by the look of it the agent involved not being registered at the FA as he was only registered with FIFA.

It''s a cock up but he''s been fine to play all season and we''ve not even been found guilty yet. If we''ve done wrong we should be fined but we''ve gained no sporting advantage through this so should get no sporting penalty imo.

 

It''s a bit pathetic that so many Norwich fans seem to want us to lose points, I''d worry about about your own form and making sure you get promoted the old fashioned way on the pitch rather than through a paperwork error. Still hope you nick 2nd though and think you have a great chance of doing so as Cardiff and Forest have fallen apart recently.

[/quote]

He was ineligible the moment the third party rule came in even if he may have been eligible before, although surely that is on dodgy ground bearing in mind the Tevez affair . QPR should have owned up at that time but didn''t and thus their current indictment by the FA.

[Middlesxhoop 0]

Yeah really? How do we assess his contribution then? Come on be realistic he''s been with us for two seasons not some last minute talismanic signing who has inspired us to the top of the table - how do we deal with the games he played last season when we were well under par? do we say that he affected the outcome of the league last season so we should look again at our results against the promoted and relegated sides from last term and redistribute points? of all the arguments put forward this is the most ridiculous. We still haven''t been found guilty of anything as I posted earlier.

[paul moy 235]

[quote user="Middlesxhoop"]Yeah really? How do we assess his contribution then? Come on be realistic he''s been with us for two seasons not some last minute talismanic signing who has inspired us to the top of the table - how do we deal with the games he played last season when we were well under par? do we say that he affected the outcome of the league last season so we should look again at our results against the promoted and relegated sides from last term and redistribute points? of all the arguments put forward this is the most ridiculous. We still haven''t been found guilty of anything as I posted earlier.[/quote]

Contribution is irrelevant for ineligible players. It''s a standard three point deduction per game selected, based on past precedents, but I am sure that QPR will argue mitigating circumstances.

[alysha 0]

[quote user="norfolkchance1"]I always think these things should be measured on the contribution the person has made. If they have done wrong and it is proved and he has played and possibly created chances or even scored goals which have beaten teams then he won''t have just created a disadvantage for us and the promotion chasing teams it will have affected the other end of the table as well.[/quote]

How can you measure contribution accuratly though? It''s a very grey area. For example, Fox might not have scored loads or have loads of assists but he is a vital member of our team. If you break the rules, the punishment should be in place regardless of many goals or assists they have got etc.

[paul moy 235]

[quote user="Middlesxhoop"]Yeah really? How do we assess his contribution then? Come on be realistic he''s been with us for two seasons not some last minute talismanic signing who has inspired us to the top of the table - how do we deal with the games he played last season when we were well under par? do we say that he affected the outcome of the league last season so we should look again at our results against the promoted and relegated sides from last term and redistribute points? of all the arguments put forward this is the most ridiculous. We still haven''t been found guilty of anything as I posted earlier.[/quote]

So in theory the FA could backdate the punishment to last season and relegate you...[:#]

[Middlesxhoop 0]

Nice to see the usual balanced responses based on nothing more than a desire to nick top spot on a technicality without doing it on the pitch- as I have already said:

1. We haven''t been found guilty. 2. Dock ten points and we''ll still go up. 3. We are where we are on merit.

I can see where the Norwich supporting Mick Dennis gets his bitter and twisted reporting skills from now - shame cos I always had time for your club now I hope Swansea put a run together and force you into the play offs where you get beaten by Reading over two legs. Ta ta.

[qprdave 0]

[quote user="paul moy"]

He was ineligible the moment the third party rule came in even if he may have been eligible before, although surely that is on dodgy ground bearing in mind the Tevez affair . QPR should have owned up at that time but didn''t and thus their current indictment by the FA.

[/quote]

QPR did inform the Football league of the problem which how they know about it, the football league have no rules against third party ownership so rather than try and get some rules in place they just let the FA deal with it.

As I said before though Rangers have not been charged with playing an ineligible player so I think it''s safe to assume he has been fine to play all this time and if he wasn''t allowed to play the the FA and football league have had almost two years now to mention that he''s not allowed to play.

No one really knows what the outcome will be but the club are making plenty of noise locally that they have done nothing wrong.

Someone else mentioned the fee announced which was laughed at by most of our fans, the club like to pretend they spend more money than they actually have to show ambition, this came just after they''d announced Magilton as manager and were trying to shift season tickets. The actuial deal was we pay £3.5million if we get into europe and he wins the world cup or some other crazy thing that will never happen. Who the money goes to is obviously an issue though.

[Noseybonk 0]

[quote user="Middlesxhoop"]Nice to see the usual balanced responses based on nothing more than a desire to nick top spot on a technicality without doing it on the pitch- as I have already said: 1. We haven''t been found guilty. 2. Dock ten points and we''ll still go up. 3. We are where we are on merit. I can see where the Norwich supporting Mick Dennis gets his bitter and twisted reporting skills from now - shame cos I always had time for your club now I hope Swansea put a run together and force you into the play offs where you get beaten by Reading over two legs. Ta ta.[/quote]

 

Blimey, calm down. Most of the posts on this thread say that you deserve to go up and don''t want a points deduction.

Wind your neck in.

 

 

[Lambert is King 0]

[quote user="Middlesxhoop"]Nice to see the usual balanced responses based on nothing more than a desire to nick top spot on a technicality without doing it on the pitch- as I have already said: 1. We haven''t been found guilty. 2. Dock ten points and we''ll still go up. 3. We are where we are on merit. I can see where the Norwich supporting Mick Dennis gets his bitter and twisted reporting skills from now - shame cos I always had time for your club now I hope Swansea put a run together and force you into the play offs where you get beaten by Reading over two legs. Ta ta.[/quote]

Not at all, have accepted you have won the league for months however had you not had a benefactor come along you would have been in league 1 by now. Here is the point however whatever rubbish your club are feeding you one of the charges made against you was undisclosed payments to agents. Now let me know if I am wrong but Luton did this once ( not several times as are the charges against your club ) and they were deducted 18 points for that offence. Your actions could actually stitch us completely because the charges are such that you could be thrown into league 1 meaning we will lose 4 points and others will only lose 1. You have to conceed that the person who made these decisions to break these rules basically cheated.

Dont also forget if you are not deducted points again for some of the charges a precident has been set by Sheff U and West Ham ie if the team finishing 3rd decides to sue you if you are not deducted points the case will be heard in a court of law.

BUT MOST IMPORTANTLY FIND YOUR MANAGERS COMMENTS ABOUT WHAT HE THOUGHT SHOULD HAPPEN TO WEST HAM WHEN HE WAS SHEFF UTD MANAGER - HOW CAN HE CHANGE HIS OPINION NOW ? YOU CANT CALL WEST HAM CHEATS BUT IT IS OK FOR YOU - AFRAID WHAT GOES AROUND COMES AROUND

[@jayncfc 0]

BOOM