PDA

View Full Version : Pars back in scottish cup (MERGED)



CallumLaidlaw
21-01-2010, 05:45 PM
on SSN now

ancienthibby
21-01-2010, 05:46 PM
Upheld!!

May Welsh and Currie grab their second chance with both boots!!:greengrin

ancienthibby
21-01-2010, 05:48 PM
on SSN now

Admins, Merge!!

sunshine1875
21-01-2010, 05:51 PM
on SSN now

Is it a replay or does the original result stand?

lapsedhibee
21-01-2010, 05:58 PM
Is it a replay or does the original result stand?Not sure if they've said yet. Bloke presenter on SSN just confirming that the problem was caused by an "illegible" player.

ancienthibby
21-01-2010, 05:59 PM
Is it a replay or does the original result stand?


Per Radio Scotland, it will be a replay, hence my wishes for the Hibs boys!!

ancient hibee
21-01-2010, 06:07 PM
Not much point in having rules then?

jgl07
21-01-2010, 06:11 PM
Not sure if they've said yet. Bloke presenter on SSN just confirming that the problem was caused by an "illegible" player.
Couldn't they read the team sheet?

Jim44
21-01-2010, 06:18 PM
Couldn't they read the team sheet?

Their manager said that he read the list on the morning of the match and that the banned player's name was not on it. Either he was lying or he is illiterate. Bottom line was they were out of order but to add insult to injury they also contravened some other regulations. Shocking decision which makes you wonder if some level of corruption is in the background. :bitchy:

Sylar
21-01-2010, 06:23 PM
Absolute joke.

MSK
21-01-2010, 06:25 PM
Game to be played at Ochilview ..

Hakim Sar
21-01-2010, 06:25 PM
So henry cheats and gets away with it

Dunfermline use 2 ineligable players and fail to stick to 2 under21's in squad rule and are barely punished

The game has gone mad and as usual the SFA are absolute garbage.

Scenario - dunfermline knock out Celtic under exact same circumstances - would they get a replay? of course not

Hibbie_Cameron
21-01-2010, 06:28 PM
Whats the point in punishing teams when they almost always win their appeals? Why not just make a decision and stick with it rather than backing down at almost every opportunity.

The SFA must have knew the pars would appeal so why not just let them off with it the first time round or ban them without right to appeal

the_ginger_hibee
21-01-2010, 06:31 PM
Just when you thought you couldn't compromise the integrity and reputation of the scottish cup anymore.....

..this happens. I mean FFS make a decision and stick by it, or just make sure you get it right first. I honestly don't have an opinion either way, but its a complete farce from every side.

Can the SFA, SPL, SFL, DHL, WHSmiths* or whatever faceless fat cat suits that are running the show this week no take a Usain Bolt to ****? Cheers. :dizzy:

(*no offense to DHL & WHS)

MSK
21-01-2010, 06:32 PM
Whats the point in punishing teams when they almost always win their appeals? Why not just make a decision and stick with it rather than backing down at almost every opportunity.

The SFA must have knew the pars would appeal so why not just let them off with it the first time round or ban them without right to appealMore laughable is the fact they (Dunfermline) have been fined £30k but they will have revenue from the first game & now the "replay" too so in effect the gates will pay the fine ...:confused:

What a complete farce ..only in Scotland eh !!!

jgl07
21-01-2010, 06:34 PM
More laughable is the fact they (Dunfermline) have been fined £30k but they will have revenue from the first game & now the "replay" too so in effect the gates will pay the fine ...:confused:

What a complete farce ..only in Scotland eh !!!
Aye like there will be more than 500 at the replay!

Hainan Hibs
21-01-2010, 06:39 PM
The people that run the game in Scotland don't have a clue and it's ridiculous muppets like Gordon Smith can hold high power jobs at the SFA. The suits at the SFA,SPL, and every other joke of an organisation running the game here couldn't organise a piss up in a brewery.

The sad thing is it won't change.

scoopyboy
21-01-2010, 06:41 PM
So henry cheats and gets away with it

Dunfermline use 2 ineligable players and fail to stick to 2 under21's in squad rule and are barely punished

The game has gone mad and as usual the SFA are absolute garbage.

Scenario - dunfermline knock out Celtic under exact same circumstances - would they get a replay? of course not

for a bonus point name the two players

MSK
21-01-2010, 06:47 PM
Aye like there will be more than 500 at the replay!If you read my post i said they will get the revenue from both games ..

ancienthibby
21-01-2010, 06:51 PM
If you read my post i said they will get the revenue from both games ..

Will they, though??

This is the Cup - revenues are split evenly between the two teams after costs, is this not so??

GreenPJ
21-01-2010, 06:55 PM
If you read my post i said they will get the revenue from both games ..

I thought Scottish Cup you had to split 50/50 the revenue. This won't cover the cost of the fine when taking into considerations other overheads.

The bigger tragedy as had been said is the SFA. Why ever make the decision to chuck them out in the first place if they are then just going to overturn on appeal. Whatever decision they come up with, bloody stick to it, they are spineless fools.

Also why on earth fine clubs in the current climate. Scottish football is ****ed enough without the SFA contributing to clubs precarious predicament. If there is a punishment due then the current climate dictates it should be something other than hard fast cash.

MSK
21-01-2010, 06:56 PM
Will they, though??

This is the Cup - revenues are split evenly between the two teams after costs, is this not so??My point is its a token fine ..a pointless fine when you consider they have the revenue from both games, at the very least it will go a long way to paying the £30k.. the fine meted out is hardly a punishment when you consider in all probability Dunfermline will go through & get up to £250k v Celtic ..

ancienthibby
21-01-2010, 07:08 PM
My point is its a token fine ..a pointless fine when you consider they have the revenue from both games, at the very least it will go a long way to paying the £30k.. the fine meted out is hardly a punishment when you consider in all probability Dunfermline will go through & get up to £250k v Celtic ..

Er, no!!

MSK
21-01-2010, 07:09 PM
Er, no!!Er no what ..?

ancienthibby
21-01-2010, 07:11 PM
Er no what ..?


Cup revenue is split 50/50 between the two competing teams!!

Comprende??

MSK
21-01-2010, 07:15 PM
Cup revenue is split 50/50 between the two competing teams!!

Comprende??Try no act the smartarse eh ..i know fine well the revenue is split !!!!!

.Sean.
21-01-2010, 07:16 PM
Replay, joke.

I dinnae care if they humped Stenny, they showed blatant disregard for the rules so the appeal should've been kicked into touch.

stubru59
21-01-2010, 07:16 PM
Precedent set here. Play your ineligible star striker, and if its noticed, claim his name was not on the original team sheet.

Tell them the failure to name the required number of under 2'1s was all the fault of the lassie in the office.

Furthermore, explain the alteration to the team sheet after it had been handed to the ref as just one of those things.

Why suspend a player if you can get away with playing him anyway? Under 21 quota? Really just a guideline which you would be best to ignore.

Team sheets? Nobody cares who plays and when, its just a paper exercise to keep the clowns at the SFA in a job.

ancienthibby
21-01-2010, 07:18 PM
Try no act the smartarse eh ..i know fine well the revenue is split !!!!!


So your keyboard is brain dead!

Quite obviously:devil:

lapsedhibee
21-01-2010, 07:22 PM
Couldn't they read the team sheet?

:greengrin

Leithenhibby
21-01-2010, 07:42 PM
It seems a long way round for a shortcut..:bitchy:

Perhaps this would have gone by now had the top brass thought it through first :rolleyes: I feel this is more along the lines of crime/punishment....

heretoday
21-01-2010, 08:06 PM
This is a daft precedent to set. What's the point of having clear rules if clubs can appeal them successfully?

Danderhall Hibs
21-01-2010, 08:21 PM
Dunfermline have got a better chance at knocking Celtic out so fair play to the SFA on continuing the "Hibs for the Cup" conspiracy.

scoopyboy
21-01-2010, 08:45 PM
I'm pretty sure DAFC would be out the cup if the SFA hadn't bungled on a couple of things.

Firstly George Peat chaired the meeting that threw them out which was against the rules as he had previous Stenhousemuir connections.

Secondly they (SFA)tried to be too smart as they quoted what they (DAFC)were being expelled for.

One thing the SFA told DAFC was that had they left the original incorrect team sheet they would not have been thrown out as that was one offence and changing the sheet was another. Adding the banned player makes it three.

However it was the SFA referee that instructed DAFC to change the team sheet and therefore they carried out an instruction from an SFA appointed official.

DAFC had legal representation there today and if they weren't reinstated could well have taken out a court injunction to halt the next tie taking place.
They would have won that as well.

I think DAFC should have been expelled but it was yet more SFA bungles that caused the reinstatement.

PS the sell on for Bamba is 20% tops.

Auckland Hibs
21-01-2010, 09:45 PM
I'm pretty sure DAFC would be out the cup if the SFA hadn't bungled on a couple of things.

Firstly George Peat chaired the meeting that threw them out which was against the rules as he had previous Stenhousemuir connections.

Secondly they (SFA)tried to be too smart as they quoted what they (DAFC)were being expelled for.

One thing the SFA told DAFC was that had they left the original incorrect team sheet they would not have been thrown out as that was one offence and changing the sheet was another. Adding the banned player makes it three.

However it was the SFA referee that instructed DAFC to change the team sheet and therefore they carried out an instruction from an SFA appointed official.

DAFC had legal representation there today and if they weren't reinstated could well have taken out a court injunction to halt the next tie taking place.
They would have won that as well.

I think DAFC should have been expelled but it was yet more SFA bungles that caused the reinstatement.

PS the sell on for Bamba is 20% tops.

Did they discuss that at the hearing today? :confused:

scoopyboy
21-01-2010, 09:48 PM
Did they discuss that at the hearing today? :confused:

What do you think?

derekHFC
21-01-2010, 10:39 PM
Cup revenue is split 50/50 between the two competing teams!!

Comprende??

No it aint. :wink:

The home team gets 60% with the away team getting 40%. This is due to running costs for the home team.

Caversham Green
22-01-2010, 09:00 AM
I seem to be in a minority in thinking that this is the right decision. If the SFA had imposed a fine and ordered a replay in the first place I think most people would have accepted that.

Anyway, is Calum Woods eligible (or legible) to play in the replay, having served (or not served) his suspension in the first game? Alternatively, if Hibs were to buy him now, would he be cup-tied? After all the tie he played in is void, and he shouldn't have played in it anyway.

davemcbain
22-01-2010, 09:20 AM
Dumb question: If the match is going to be replayed, do the goals from the previous match count in the players total for the season?

ancient hibee
22-01-2010, 09:55 AM
I see the usual suspects are on here blaming the SFA and Gordon Smith for Dunfermline being reinstated.In fact as allowed for under the rules it was an independent appeal panel and the SFA do not agree with its decision but hey let's not have facts clouding an argument.

GlesgaeHibby
22-01-2010, 10:01 AM
Dunfermline have got a better chance at knocking Celtic out so fair play to the SFA on continuing the "Hibs for the Cup" conspiracy.

:agree: If Dunfy can knock Celtic out it makes getting to the latter stages easier for us.

Golden Bear
22-01-2010, 10:45 AM
I'm pretty sure DAFC would be out the cup if the SFA hadn't bungled on a couple of things.

Firstly George Peat chaired the meeting that threw them out which was against the rules as he had previous Stenhousemuir connections.

Secondly they (SFA)tried to be too smart as they quoted what they (DAFC)were being expelled for.

One thing the SFA told DAFC was that had they left the original incorrect team sheet they would not have been thrown out as that was one offence and changing the sheet was another. Adding the banned player makes it three.

However it was the SFA referee that instructed DAFC to change the team sheet and therefore they carried out an instruction from an SFA appointed official.

DAFC had legal representation there today and if they weren't reinstated could well have taken out a court injunction to halt the next tie taking place.
They would have won that as well.

I think DAFC should have been expelled but it was yet more SFA bungles that caused the reinstatement.
PS the sell on for Bamba is 20% tops.

:agree:

The decision is unsurprising and the circumstances are totally consistent with the incompetence and buffoonery which we've all come to expect from the SFA.

lapsedhibee
22-01-2010, 10:51 AM
I see the usual suspects are on here blaming the SFA and Gordon Smith for Dunfermline being reinstated.In fact as allowed for under the rules it was an independent appeal panel and the SFA do not agree with its decision but hey let's not have facts clouding an argument.



The decision is unsurprising and the circumstances are totally consistent with the incompetence and buffoonery which we've all come to expect from the SFA.

:hmmm:

mjhibby
22-01-2010, 10:56 AM
Dumb question: If the match is going to be replayed, do the goals from the previous match count in the players total for the season?

Even dumber question.If the game finishes level after 90 mins does it then go to a replay and is that replay to be held at dunfermline.If that is the case im sure the pars would be happy with a draw (on astroturf btw)where they can get them back to their pitch.Do bookings count from the first game and surely a better punishment would have been for stenhousmuir to get a percentage of the gate the pars will get against sellick.
Have to say though common sense in the end has prevailed as being thrown out for incorrect team sheets is the way things are done at amateur level when a team looks for a way to progress having been humped in the original tie.Wouldnt it be a delicious irony should the pars get knocked out.

Golden Bear
22-01-2010, 10:57 AM
:hmmm:

Read Scoopy Boy's post - therein lies the SFA incompetence which led to the successful appeal albeit the decision was made by an independent panel.

heretoday
22-01-2010, 12:06 PM
:agree: If Dunfy can knock Celtic out it makes getting to the latter stages easier for us.

That's true. Come on Ye Pars!

Phil MaGlass
22-01-2010, 12:24 PM
If Dunfy are smart then when they get Celtic they should again field an illegible player pay 30K then get another replay, Dunfy loaded.:greengrin

lapsedhibee
22-01-2010, 01:21 PM
Read Scoopy Boy's post - therein lies the SFA incompetence which led to the successful appeal albeit the decision was made by an independent panel.

:agree: My :hmmm: wasn't because you and ancient were contradicting each other, but a genuine :hmmm: at the overall state of the Scottish game's admin. Personally can't take the idea of an 'independent' panel at all seriously. Whoever's on it, it would never, ever, in a brazillion years come up with a decision which genuinely went against the OF's interest. Utter shambles back to front, from start to finish and upside down. Do refs still get to decide themselves whether or not they've made a mistake? The mind boggles.

cheltenhamhibee
22-01-2010, 04:41 PM
:agree: If Dunfy can knock Celtic out it makes getting to the latter stages easier for us.

if ??? if yer aunty had baws she'd be yer uncle

Jack
22-01-2010, 04:52 PM
Based on whats happened in the past this was the right decision.
What the SFA need to do now is have a review of the rules and punnishments so that we can move forward with a clean sheet as far as precidents are concerned.

blackpoolhibs
22-01-2010, 05:07 PM
Will the replayed game be the full 90 minutes, or just from when the offence took place?:devil:

Hank Schrader
22-01-2010, 05:08 PM
PS the sell on for Bamba is 20% tops.

:agree:

I believe that to be spot on, according to what I was told the other day by someone closely connected to DAFC.