Danny Wilson should have been suspended v ICT?

[Siralbertkidd]

Exactly, if he has served his suspension then there will be paperwork confirming it and it would have been produced by now.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/r/rangers/8580683.stm

Looks specific to Scottish League Cup to me, games in England, played or not, are irrelevant.

Get out of that SFA!

[LaMotta]

Ive also let Sue Barker know through the medium of dance. If there are any questions around sport, she's yer man.

[Mikey]

Exactly, if he has served his suspension then there will be paperwork confirming it and it would have been produced by now.

The only logical reason for the delay is that he hasn't served the suspension and they're getting their facts straight before deciding what to do.



http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/r/rangers/8580683.stm

Looks specific to Scottish League Cup to me, games in England, played or not, are irrelevant.

Get out of that SFA!

It is League Cup specific. If it wasn't then Zaliukas wouldn't be missing the final as he would just serve the suspension in a league game in the run up to it.

Zaliukas will be missing the final. As will the rest of them :hilarious

[Siralbertkidd]

Ive also let Sue Barker know through the medium of dance. If there are any questions around sport, she's yer man.

Had a text back from Roger Daltry of The Who -

I asked bobby dylan
I asked the beatles
I asked timothy leary
But he couldn't help me either -

The cover up has gone on too long!

[on-the-level]

Dose it no just make it even better that it was Craig Thomson who sent the
future Yam Wilson off!!?:na na:

Talk about what goes around comes around

A Yam costing them a final by sending a Hun off!!!

[greenginger]

It was posted previous that Euan Murray says Hearts contacted the SFL about Wilson's availability to play and got the all-clear.

That is not enough. Looking at all the footnotes and reminders on the SFA suspension record pages, it was Hearts responsibility to check the suspension situation with the SFA Disciplinary Department. Checking with the SFL counts for nothing although who knows what the SFA would
have said. :confused:

[Judas Iscariot]

He was in the squad. Didn't make the bench but was eligible for the match.

Where does it say he was eligible?

The merricks reckon this is when he served his ban, if he wasn't on the bench could they be right?

[kev1875]

Unless he was on the bench it doesn't matter if he was eligible for the match.

Of course it does, if he can play he is not suspended is he?

[Judas Iscariot]

The only logical reason for the delay is that he hasn't served the suspension and they're getting their facts straight before deciding what to do.




It is League Cup specific. If it wasn't then Zaliukas wouldn't be missing the final as he would just serve the suspension in a league game in the run up to it.

Zaliukas will be missing the final. As will the rest of them :hilarious

Does that not change when a player moves to another country/FA?

[Ozyhibby]

Where does it say he was eligible?

The merricks reckon this is when he served his ban, if he wasn't on the bench could they be right?

They will only be correct if there is a letter from the FA informing Liverpool that he is suspended.

[kev1875]

Where does it say he was eligible?

The merricks reckon this is when he served his ban, if he wasn't on the bench could they be right?

See the guardian article listing both squads and no suspensions for either team.

[Mikey]

It was posted previous that Euan Murray says Hearts contacted the SFL about Wilson's availability to play and got the all-clear.

That is not enough. Looking at all the footnotes and reminders on the SFA suspension record pages, it was Hearts responsibility to check the suspension situation with the SFA Disciplinary Department. Checking with the SFL counts for nothing although who knows what the SFA would
have said. :confused:

If they haven't asked the right people the right questions then they're oot!

[Judas Iscariot]

See the guardian article listing both squads and no suspensions for either team.

Only "paper talk" that's nothing official...

[JimBHibees]

They will only be correct if there is a letter from the FA informing Liverpool that he is suspended.

The Guardian had a review of the Liverpool Arsenal game where they clearly mentioned Wilson as being in the Pool squad and that Liverpool had no suspensions for that game. I am assuming that they would have got their information regarding suspensions from both clubs or the FA/EPL. Of course they may be wrong and it isn't as clear cut than if Wilson had been on the bench however it appears to me that there is substantial doubt whether this ban has been served.

As has been said lets see the documentary evidence. i would put money on there being some fudge about to be served up between FA/SFA saying he did serve a ban in the Arsenal game.

[Sergey]

If they haven't asked the right people the right questions then they're oot!

And as has been mentioned, the player himself must have known that he was ineligible. Simply passing the blame to the authorities saying it was there mistake just doesn't wash, especially when the club/player knew all along.

Blatant cheating.....again!

[JimBHibees]

Only "paper talk" that's nothing official...

Very true but they are likely to have got the information from either both clubs and possibly the FA/EPL who would have had a website like the SFA one which lists current suspensions.

[The_Sauz]

Remember what happened to Dunfermline http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/competitions/scottish-premier/6989662/Dunfermline-kicked-out-of-Scottish-Cup-for-breaches-of-competition-rules.html#

[Hermit Crab]

What will you all do if somehow they ordered a replay and hearts still won? Ffs paranoia with Thomson now this. Getting a bit obsessive is it not?

[Hermit Crab]

Remember what happened to Dunfermline http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/competitions/scottish-premier/6989662/Dunfermline-kicked-out-of-Scottish-Cup-for-breaches-of-competition-rules.html#

They won't kick a big team out the cup.

[Monts]

What will you all do if somehow they ordered a replay and hearts still won? Ffs paranoia with Thomson now this. Getting a bit obsessive is it not?

Laugh wholeheartedly until kick off of the replay, then support st mirren in the final? :dunno:

[#FromTheCapital]

What will you all do if somehow they ordered a replay and hearts still won? Ffs paranoia with Thomson now this. Getting a bit obsessive is it not?

Buy a St Mirren strip :wink:

For what its worth I dont think anything will come of this and its purely wishful thinking on our part

[Judas Iscariot]

What will you all do if somehow they ordered a replay and hearts still won? Ffs paranoia with Thomson now this. Getting a bit obsessive is it not?

I will cry a million tears, burn my ICT scarf and not speak to anyone for a month...

Is that ok?

[AFKA5814_Hibs]

Remember what happened to Dunfermline http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/competitions/scottish-premier/6989662/Dunfermline-kicked-out-of-Scottish-Cup-for-breaches-of-competition-rules.html#

Dunfermline appealed that decision and had to replay the game at Stenhousemuir, they won the replay 2-1.

[brog]

Where does it say he was eligible?

The merricks reckon this is when he served his ban, if he wasn't on the bench could they be right?

If Yams did indeed contact the SFA then it would seem they must have had concerns re Wilson's eligibility. I would assume that as Wilson arrived with no English suspension that these concerns must have originated from Wilson himself. He must know he hasn't served his suspension. Yams have done little wrong but ICT have been wronged & that has to be redressed.

[JimBHibees]

They won't kick a big team out the cup.

So that would be implying the rules fairly would it.

[Winston Ingram]

SFA have broken their silence




@ScottishFA Danny Wilson clarification: One match League Cup suspension notified to FA, as per FIFA regs, when player moved to Liverpool in 2010...1/3

FA does not operate competition-specific disciplinary procedures, so suspension served in first match of 2010/11 (Liverpool v Arsenal)..2/3

No outstanding suspension notified to Scottish FA when player returned to Scotland, so he was eligible to play in League Cup Semi-Final..3/3

That' last tweet confirms they didn't bother checking. Next step will no doubt be ICT asking for the paperwork to prove the suspension was served:agree:

[truehibernian]

What will you all do if somehow they ordered a replay and hearts still won? Ffs paranoia with Thomson now this. Getting a bit obsessive is it not?

Would you be saying the same if Hibs had been knocked out a major cup semi final after it had been disclosed after that a major influence on the game shouldn't have played ?

It's not obsessive, it's constructive questioning of the authorities - in other words, have they all done their job correctly.

The game in this country is in the state it's in because for far far too long, clubs and fans have 'accepted' the way the authorities work and never really called into question their practices - in the advent of wider TV audiences, social media, freelance journalism, fans forums and supporter groups, they (football authorities) cannot now hide behind old school ways - so yes, I think it's fair to question it.

After all, as someone pointed out, they (SFA/SFL) were very quick to jump down Spartans, Dunfermline and other clubs throats when they had played ineligible players. Transparency and integrity was what we were promised by Regan and Co at the start of the season - they need to live up to that promise. No real enquiry is needed - inform the media which game he served his suspension, show the documentation, and folk will accept it.

If Hearts are cleared, fair play, good luck in the final - if not then a replay beckons - however then everyone, from all clubs, are satisfied that rules are being followed and/or lessons learned so it doesn't happen again.

[JimBHibees]

What will you all do if somehow they ordered a replay and hearts still won? Ffs paranoia with Thomson now this. Getting a bit obsessive is it not?

So you dont think there is any reason for this to be investigated? Just accept Hearts word and move on irrespective of whether they have broken rules other teams have been punished severely for. Your absurd defence of Thomson and now this seems a strange stance to take for a Hibs fan.

[Judas Iscariot]

SFA have broken their silence



That' last tweet confirms they didn't bother checking. Next step will no doubt be ICT asking for the paperwork to prove the suspension was served:agree:

Well that'll be that then :greengrin

Passed a few slow news days though :faf:

[JimBHibees]

Would you be saying the same if Hibs had been knocked out a major cup semi final after it had been disclosed after that a major influence on the game shouldn't have played ?

It's not obsessive, it's constructive questioning of the authorities - in other words, have they all done their job correctly.

The game in this country is in the state it's in because for far far too long, clubs and fans have 'accepted' the way the authorities work and never really called into question their practices - in the advent of wider TV audiences, social media, freelance journalism, fans forums and supporter groups, they (football authorities) cannot now hide behind old school ways - so yes, I think it's fair to question it.

After all, as someone pointed out, they (SFA/SFL) were very quick to jump down Spartans, Dunfermline and other clubs throats when they had played ineligible players. Transparency and integrity was what we were promised by Regan and Co at the start of the season - they need to live up to that promise. No real enquiry is needed - inform the media which game he served his suspension, show the documentation, and folk will accept it.

If Hearts are cleared, fair play, good luck in the final - if not then a replay beckons - however then everyone, from all clubs, are satisfied that rules are being followed and/or lessons learned so it doesn't happen again.

Great post.

[Winston Ingram]

Would you be saying the same if Hibs had been knocked out a major cup semi final after it had been disclosed after that a major influence on the game shouldn't have played ?

It's not obsessive, it's constructive questioning of the authorities - in other words, have they all done their job correctly.

The game in this country is in the state it's in because for far far too long, clubs and fans have 'accepted' the way the authorities work and never really called into question their practices - in the advent of wider TV audiences, social media, freelance journalism, fans forums and supporter groups, they (football authorities) cannot now hide behind old school ways - so yes, I think it's fair to question it.

After all, as someone pointed out, they (SFA/SFL) were very quick to jump down Spartans, Dunfermline and other clubs throats when they had played ineligible players. Transparency and integrity was what we were promised by Regan and Co at the start of the season - they need to live up to that promise. No real enquiry is needed - inform the media which game he served his suspension, show the documentation, and folk will accept it.

If Hearts are cleared, fair play, good luck in the final - if not then a replay beckons - however then everyone, from all clubs, are satisfied that rules are being followed and/or lessons learned so it doesn't happen again.

Well said:agree:

One thing is for certain is that if it was the other way round kickback would be in meltdown

[CallumLaidlaw]

@ScottishFA: Danny Wilson clarification: One match League Cup suspension notified to FA, as per FIFA regs, when player moved to Liverpool in 2010...1/3

@ScottishFA: FA does not operate competition-specific disciplinary procedures, so suspension served in first match of 2010/11 (Liverpool v Arsenal)..2/3

@ScottishFA: No outstanding suspension notified to Scottish FA when player returned to Scotland, so he was eligible to play in League Cup Semi-Final..3/3

[Winston Ingram]

Well that'll be that then :greengrin

Passed a few slow news days though :faf:

Not sure if it will be. ICT will ask for documentation that likely doesn't exist as it appears he was in the squad for the Arsenal game.

The FA, being a relatively well run organisation will likely have their angle covered so it'll be back to the sorry excuse of an authority that we have:agree:

[CallumLaidlaw]

Not sure if it will be. ICT will ask for documentation that likely doesn't exist as it appears he was in the squad for the Arsenal game.

The FA, being a relatively well run organisation will likely have their angle covered so it'll be back to the sorry excuse of an authority that we have:agree:

Yip, this match preview has Wilson listed in the squad, and also states that there were no suspensions for the match.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2010/aug/13/squad-sheets-liverpool-arsenal

[Juice-Terry]

If the ban is not tournament-specific (as the SFA now claim), then I presume Zaliukas will be allowed to play in the final given that he serves his ban during a league game between now and the final? Strange....

[CallumLaidlaw]

If the ban is not tournament-specific (as the SFA now claim), then I presume Zaliukas will be allowed to play in the final given that he serves his ban during a league game between now and the final? Strange....

It's only England that is not tournament specific I think.

[JimBHibees]

If the ban is not tournament-specific (as the SFA now claim), then I presume Zaliukas will be allowed to play in the final given that he serves his ban during a league game between now and the final? Strange....

No they are saying the FA dont treat bans from players from other countries as tournament specific so it would be served in the next available game. Would be nice to see some evidence of this as the Guardian article seems to refute that though of course they may be wrong. Zaliukas will be out of the final.

[Benny Brazil]

Yip, this match preview has Wilson listed in the squad, and also states that there were no suspensions for the match.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2010/aug/13/squad-sheets-liverpool-arsenal

http://www.liverpoolfc.com/match/fixtures/first-team/liverpool-v-arsenal-2010-8-18-15-00-00/last-match-statistics

This shows that he didnt make the final match day squad or subs bench

[Juice-Terry]

It's only England that is not tournament specific I think.

I see. I think I misread "@ScottishFA: FA does not operate competition-specific disciplinary procedures, so suspension served in first match of 2010/11 (Liverpool v Arsenal)..2/3."

Pity.

[CallumLaidlaw]

http://www.liverpoolfc.com/match/fixtures/first-team/liverpool-v-arsenal-2010-8-18-15-00-00/last-match-statistics

This shows that he didnt make the final match day squad or subs bench

Doesn't mean he was suspended tho

[Benny Brazil]

Doesn't mean he was suspended tho

No it doesn't I grant you that - but it doesnt mean he wasnt - how many times have we seen squads for upcoming matches in the media online and papers show players who were injured or supsended included

[scott7_0(Prague)]

Doesn't mean he was suspended tho

No but it would mean he has served his ban. :rolleyes:

[JimBHibees]

No but it would mean he has served his ban. :rolleyes:

Not the case if he was eligible to play but wasnt chosen.

[JimBHibees]

No it doesn't I grant you that - but it doesnt mean he wasnt - how many times have we seen squads for upcoming matches in the media online and papers show players who were injured or supsended included

It gives both authorities and easy out to say he served it then thus removing what could be embarressing. It would be good if they could provide some evidence though however they will no doubt sit on it and assume ICT take what has been said as accurate.

[StevieC]

http://www.liverpoolfc.com/match/fixtures/first-team/liverpool-v-arsenal-2010-8-18-15-00-00/last-match-statistics

This shows that he didnt make the final match day squad or subs bench

He didn't make his league debut until at least a month after that fixture, so his exclusion was more likely down to managerial choice than a suspension.

The only ones that can confirm whether he was served a suspension or not it the FA themselves.
The FA may view that as the transfered suspension was Scottish League Cup specific it did not apply in their league and did not apply it.

[StevieC]

@ScottishFA: Danny Wilson clarification: One match League Cup suspension notified to FA, as per FIFA regs, when player moved to Liverpool in 2010...1/3

@ScottishFA: FA does not operate competition-specific disciplinary procedures, so suspension served in first match of 2010/11 (Liverpool v Arsenal)..2/3

@ScottishFA: No outstanding suspension notified to Scottish FA when player returned to Scotland, so he was eligible to play in League Cup Semi-Final..3/3

They are not saying anything that hasn't already been said, although I suspect that the bit in bold is an assumption on their part (to cover their backs?) rather than factual.

[StevieC]

It gives both authorities and easy out to say he served it then

The FA would have paperwork to confirm that it was served for this game.
Liverpool played a UEFA Cup game (which Wilson played in) prior to the league game. If the suspension is not competition specific should it have kicked in for the UEFA Cup game?

[jeffers]

If I'm reading this correctly what is to stop Hearts sending Zaliuakas on loan to an English club, let him serve his suspension there, recall before the final so he can then play in it ?

[jonty]

The FA would have paperwork to confirm that it was served for this game.
Liverpool played a UEFA Cup game (which Wilson played in) prior to the league game. If the suspension is not competition specific should it have kicked in for the UEFA Cup game?

http://nav.thefa.com/sitecore/content/TheFA/Home/TheFA/Disciplinary/NewsAndFeatures/2010/DiscAug1011
Disciplinary hearings - would a transfer suspension be listed? you'd have thought so.

[JimBHibees]

The FA would have paperwork to confirm that it was served for this game.
Liverpool played a UEFA Cup game (which Wilson played in) prior to the league game. If the suspension is not competition specific should it have kicked in for the UEFA Cup game?

I would doubt a domestic ban could be served in a European tournament. I agree though that it shouldn't be too difficult for the FA to come up with evidence be that a document/email sent to the club or a web page of that time listing all the players suspended for that game.

[clerriehibs]

What will you all do if somehow they ordered a replay and hearts still won? Ffs paranoia with Thomson now this. Getting a bit obsessive is it not?

Aye ok then, just you let us know what we should and shouldn't focus on regarding our lying cheating sc u m neebors then. Or should we not focus on them at all, because they're not lying cheating sc u m neebors?

ffs

[greenginger]

Just because Wilson did not feature in the Liverpool v Arsenal game does not mean he was serving a suspension. He was not picked or named as a sub. for Liverpool's next match on 23rd August away to Man. City either.

[GoldenEagle]

It's irrelevant whether Wilson was picked for the squad or not, if we assume that what the SFA have said today as being 100% then by not taking part in Liverpool's first domestic fixture then the ban is served.

At that point it should be 'End of'....however there's a part of me that's not convinced around this and it would be interesting if anyone could find a cross border transfer where the player still has a specific cup ban outstanding and then see if he played in the next game with his new club.

I think however the point has been cleared up and probably best now to move on.

[lapsedhibee]

I think however the point has been cleared up and probably best now to move on.

:bitchy: Would be utterly mental, given their performance regarding the the huns during 2012, to accept the SFA's assurances without proper documentary backup.

[bigwheel]

I suspect we have the answer to this now ...interesting op though - well noticed !

[Sir David Gray]

My take on this is that the SFA have messed up here, big style, they know they've messed up and just don't want to admit it so they've decided to make up a story that is total nonsense, but sounds semi-plausible, to try and play the whole thing down.

I have no doubts whatsoever that Danny Wilson was ineligible to play on Saturday but that the SFA just won't admit that they have made a huge mistake here and have overlooked the proper documentation.

His ban was explicitly for one Scottish League Cup tie, their own website states that! It had nothing to do with any other competition and the fact that he just happened to be a bit part player at Liverpool has helped them get out of this one as I have no doubt that Wilson was simply just not picked for their first game of season 10/11 against Arsenal.

Did someone on here not e-mail the FA regarding this and they replied saying that the ban would have come under the jurisdiction of the SFA and he would therefore need to get in contact with them for further clarification.

That makes sense to me and if that is the case, Inverness should be taking this as far as they possibly can because something stinks as far as I'm concerned and it's not just from the stench of the crap that was smeared on the toilet walls at Easter Road on Saturday!

[greenginger]

It's irrelevant whether Wilson was picked for the squad or not, if we assume that what the SFA have said today as being 100% then by not taking part in Liverpool's first domestic fixture then the ban is served.

At that point it should be 'End of'....however there's a part of me that's not convinced around this and it would be interesting if anyone could find a cross border transfer where the player still has a specific cup ban outstanding and then see if he played in the next game with his new club.

I think however the point has been cleared up and probably best now to move on.

I don't know how it can be said that the point is cleared up.

Liverpool stated the night before the Arsenal match that Wilson was not selected for, that they had NO player suspensions. :confused:

[Sergey]

I don't know how it can be said that the point is cleared up.

Liverpool stated the night before the Arsenal match that Wilson was not selected for, that they had NO player suspensions. :confused:


ICT aren't going to let the matter go - they've just released this statement:


Club Statement

There has been considerable debate in the Media about the eligibility of Hearts player, Danny Wilson to play in last Saturday's Scottish Communities League Cup Semi-final.

We have spoken to the SFA Disciplinary Committee who have confirmed that Danny WAS eligible to play on Saturday.

This was checked out by Hearts and the SPL prior to Saturday's game. There was no Notice of Suspension accompanying his registration paperwork when he returned from Liverpool FC.

As a result of discussions that have taken place throughout the afternoon, the club will be seeking further details and an explanation on events surrounding this matter.

[JimBHibees]

I don't know how it can be said that the point is cleared up.

Liverpool stated the night before the Arsenal match that Wilson was not selected for, that they had NO player suspensions. :confused:

Where did they say that? Was that from the Guardian article or a direct quote?

[on-the-level]

If I'm reading this correctly what is to stop Hearts sending Zaliuakas on loan to an English club, let him serve his suspension there, recall before the final so he can then play in it ?

:cb I smell Yam fud

[Saorsa]

ICT aren't going to let the matter go - they've just released this statement:Hope they insist on the paper work of the suspension being served wherever it is claimed tae have be served. If it cannae be proven it should be replayed. Absolute disgrace if the outcome is otherwise, if somebody has ****ed up it wisane ICT and they shouldnae suffer.

[joebakerforever]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/21239532

Looks like the above confirms Jambos are in the clear

[Killiehibbie]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/21239532

Looks like the above confirms Jambos are in the clearStill nothing confirming that he actually served his ban rather than not being picked. For all those saying it's not worth pursuing, how much money is at stake for a team reaching the final?

[jeffers]

:cb I smell Yam fud

Who are you calling a Yam fud ?? Yeah I've not posted before, but so what ? I was trying to make the point that Wilson supposedly served his suspension somehow was served in some unknown game in England and didn't to apply to the Scottish League Cup. So by that logic what would there be to stop them or any other team loaning a player out to an English club so they could serve a suspension and then return from the loan and be available for the next round ?

[Part/Time Supporter]

ICT aren't going to let the matter go - they've just released this statement:

That was the statement they made yesterday afternoon.

Terry Butcher has apparently said at a press call today that they have accepted the "he was banned for Liverpool v Arsenal" explanation.

Fair enough IMO, as there wasn't really anywhere for them to go other than getting the lawyers in.

[Hibee87]

Who are you calling a Yam fud ?? Yeah I've not posted before, but so what ? I was trying to make the point that Wilson supposedly served his suspension somehow was served in some unknown game in England and didn't to apply to the Scottish League Cup. So by that logic what would there be to stop them or any other team loaning a player out to an English club so they could serve a suspension and then return from the loan and be available for the next round ?

I made this point to my mate the other day.

Zaliuskas is suspended for the final right? Whats to stop hearts 'loaning him' to say carlise he serves his suspension in the first game he would be due to play then recall him??

[brog]

My take on this is that the SFA have messed up here, big style, they know they've messed up and just don't want to admit it so they've decided to make up a story that is total nonsense, but sounds semi-plausible, to try and play the whole thing down.

I have no doubts whatsoever that Danny Wilson was ineligible to play on Saturday but that the SFA just won't admit that they have made a huge mistake here and have overlooked the proper documentation.

His ban was explicitly for one Scottish League Cup tie, their own website states that! It had nothing to do with any other competition and the fact that he just happened to be a bit part player at Liverpool has helped them get out of this one as I have no doubt that Wilson was simply just not picked for their first game of season 10/11 against Arsenal.

Did someone on here not e-mail the FA regarding this and they replied saying that the ban would have come under the jurisdiction of the SFA and he would therefore need to get in contact with them for further clarification.

That makes sense to me and if that is the case, Inverness should be taking this as far as they possibly can because something stinks as far as I'm concerned and it's not just from the stench of the crap that was smeared on the toilet walls at Easter Road on Saturday!

I think you've summed it up perfectly. SFA covering up their own cock-up!

[ekhibee]

I read somewhere that he has served his suspension down south, against Northampton Town. I don't know if that's valid, particularly in view of the suspension being specifically for the Scottish League Cup, the information from the SFA seems to be a load of horse****, but then are we really surprised?

[MrSmith]

My take on this is that the SFA have messed up here, big style, they know they've messed up and just don't want to admit it so they've decided to make up a story that is total nonsense, but sounds semi-plausible, to try and play the whole thing down.

I have no doubts whatsoever that Danny Wilson was ineligible to play on Saturday but that the SFA just won't admit that they have made a huge mistake here and have overlooked the proper documentation.

His ban was explicitly for one Scottish League Cup tie, their own website states that! It had nothing to do with any other competition and the fact that he just happened to be a bit part player at Liverpool has helped them get out of this one as I have no doubt that Wilson was simply just not picked for their first game of season 10/11 against Arsenal.

Did someone on here not e-mail the FA regarding this and they replied saying that the ban would have come under the jurisdiction of the SFA and he would therefore need to get in contact with them for further clarification.

That makes sense to me and if that is the case, Inverness should be taking this as far as they possibly can because something stinks as far as I'm concerned and it's not just from the stench of the crap that was smeared on the toilet walls at Easter Road on Saturday!

Couldn't disagree with any of that. Think the devils in the detail of the two tweets by @SFA:

@ScottishFA: FA does not operate competition-specific disciplinary procedures, so suspension served in first match of 2010/11 (Liverpool v Arsenal)..2/3

You mean they ain't interested in parochial rubbish.

@ScottishFA: No outstanding suspension notified to Scottish FA when player returned to Scotland, so he was eligible to play in League Cup Semi-Final..3/3

Why would they bother notifying the SFA/SFL/SPL? For my money, the FA don't recognise the ban in the first instance!

[Gatecrasher]

http://www.scottishfa.co.uk/resources/documents/Disciplinary/CurrentSuspensions/Season2009/10/March2010/PlayerSuspensions/LOS36%2825Mar%29.pdf

what is really needed is a link to the Document similar to the attached to say he was suspended for the Liverpool V Arsenal Game, If the FA have a similar document he would be shown on it?

[JimBHibees]

Couldn't disagree with any of that. Think the devils in the detail of the two tweets by @SFA:

@ScottishFA: FA does not operate competition-specific disciplinary procedures, so suspension served in first match of 2010/11 (Liverpool v Arsenal)..2/3

You mean they ain't interested in parochial rubbish.

@ScottishFA: No outstanding suspension notified to Scottish FA when player returned to Scotland, so he was eligible to play in League Cup Semi-Final..3/3

Why would they bother notifying the SFA/SFL/SPL? For my money, the FA don't recognise the ban in the first instance!

I agree I dont think he served any ban but the Arsenal game is a convenient out. If I was ICT i think I would be wanting some documentary evidence that this was indeed the case.

[jonty]

http://www.scottishfa.co.uk/resources/documents/Disciplinary/CurrentSuspensions/Season2009/10/March2010/PlayerSuspensions/LOS36%2825Mar%29.pdf

what is really needed is a link to the Document similar to the attached to say he was suspended for the Liverpool V Arsenal Game, If the FA have a similar document he would be shown on it?

I've posted a link above to the disciplinery hearings that year. its not clear if transfered suspecsion would be listed though.

[JimBHibees]

http://www.scottishfa.co.uk/resources/documents/Disciplinary/CurrentSuspensions/Season2009/10/March2010/PlayerSuspensions/LOS36%2825Mar%29.pdf

what is really needed is a link to the Document similar to the attached to say he was suspended for the Liverpool V Arsenal Game, If the FA have a similar document he would be shown on it?

You wouldnt have thought it would be too difficult to find.

[frazeHFC]

Anyone that saw the game, roughly what minute was Mckays miss? Sitter!

[Billy Whizz]

Anyone that saw the game, roughly what minute was Mckays miss? Sitter!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/scotland/21224971

Think it may have been in extra time?

[Leishy1995]

I read somewhere that he has served his suspension down south, against Northampton Town. I don't know if that's valid, particularly in view of the suspension being specifically for the Scottish League Cup, the information from the SFA seems to be a load of horse****, but then are we really surprised?

It isn't relevant because he played.

[greenlex]

Inverness should not just accept this whitewash without documented evidence. If it exists it should be easy enough to produce. I smell ******.

[Juice-Terry]

Anyone that saw the game, roughly what minute was Mckays miss? Sitter!

That miss is so bad it almost looks deliberate. I suspect Hertz bribed McKay not to score - knowing how important financially it would be for them to reach the final. Conspiracy! (Discuss.)

[Thornton Hibee]

Surely a matchday programme will confirm if Wilson was available for selection or suspended on the day

[greenginger]

The SFA position with the Wilson suspension seams to be this -

Wilson was suspended for the Liverpool v Arsenal game. It does not matter that the player never knew, that his club Liverpool and the opposition never knew, or that the English F A never knew, as far as the SFA were concerned they counted it as a suspension.

I wonder if he played for Liverpool reserves the same day ?

[jonty]

http://www.scottishfa.co.uk/resources/documents/Disciplinary/CurrentSuspensions/Season2009/10/March2010/PlayerSuspensions/LOS36%2825Mar%29.pdf

what is really needed is a link to the Document similar to the attached to say he was suspended for the Liverpool V Arsenal Game, If the FA have a similar document he would be shown on it?

Tantalisingly, this link should have the information, but the wayback machine doesnt play well with dynamic pages.
http://web.archive.org/web/20100810155946/http://www.thefa.com/TheFA/Disciplinary/SuspensionLists/PlayersAwaitingSuspension

[StevieC]

Playing "devil's advocate" here ..

The SFA sent him south with a 1 game suspension (assuming they can provide the relevant ITC to confirm this) .. he returned with no suspensions.

If the FA implimented (or didn't) the suspension, I can't see how it's an SFA issue. It's nothing really to do with them once the player leaves the country.

If the suspension is detailed on the ITC as "Scottish League Cup" specific (as it is on the SFA documentation), and the English FA did not impliment it based on that information, then the SFA may be held responsible for not checking properly upon his return.

The only organisation that can clear this up is the FA. Unfortunately their first response was that it was an SFA implimented suspension and contact the SFA regarding it.

It may be a case of trying to cover their backs, or it may be genuinely dealt with .. only the FA themselves can shed any further light on the matter.

[NotoriousLor]

Is this celtic.net?? Beyond embarrassing now boys, lets just give it a rest now eh, like I said on my first post to do with the matter who actually cares? It has no effect on us at all

[JimBHibees]

Is this celtic.net?? Beyond embarrassing now boys, lets just give it a rest now eh, like I said on my first post to do with the matter who actually cares? It has no effect on us at all

Dont get your point to be honest. Yams have for ages been playing players they palpably cant afford - remember May this year. In this game they had 2 players in on loan which again they cant afford significantly affect a game which will result in them being able to keep a stronger squad for longer and possibly stop them going bust. We now find out that there is a decent possibility one of these players may not have been eligible to play in this game hence they should be punished for it if proven to be the case.

The bit in bold is obviously complete tosh.

[JimBHibees]

Playing "devil's advocate" here ..

The SFA sent him south with a 1 game suspension (assuming they can provide the relevant ITC to confirm this) .. he returned with no suspensions.

If the FA implimented (or didn't) the suspension, I can't see how it's an SFA issue. It's nothing really to do with them once the player leaves the country.

If the suspension is detailed on the ITC as "Scottish League Cup" specific (as it is on the SFA documentation), and the English FA did not impliment it based on that information, then the SFA may be held responsible for not checking properly upon his return.

The only organisation that can clear this up is the FA. Unfortunately their first response was that it was an SFA implimented suspension and contact the SFA regarding it.

It may be a case of trying to cover their backs, or it may be genuinely dealt with .. only the FA themselves can shed any further light on the matter.

Or Liverpool

[Killiehibbie]

Is this celtic.net?? Beyond embarrassing now boys, lets just give it a rest now eh, like I said on my first post to do with the matter who actually cares? It has no effect on us at all
It will have an affect on all of us if hearts don't get the £500,000 it has been reported that reaching the final's worth and they go bust before the end of the season. Party time if this happened.

[Saorsa]

Is this celtic.net?? Beyond embarrassing now boys, lets just give it a rest now eh, like I said on my first post to do with the matter who actually cares? It has no effect on us at allRead and post something else then if this topic is of nae interest tae you! :bye:

It interests me and plenty others.

[copycat]

Is this celtic.net?? Beyond embarrassing now boys, lets just give it a rest now eh, like I said on my first post to do with the matter who actually cares? It has no effect on us at all

Certainly isnt Kickback!!

I personally care for a number of reasons, certainly for the credibility and fairness in Scottish football and more importantly if this game was to be replayed then we would get a very welcome and significant wad of cash, not interested if it was Hearts, Rangers or Bank Villa (anyone remember them) it should be thoroughly investigated for all parties.

I am sure it is all above board but would love the opportunity to make free money in order for us to be able to strengthen the squad.

So possibly your slightly patronising comments are misplaced when looking at the bigger picture.

[jonty]

The SFA position with the Wilson suspension seams to be this -

Wilson was suspended for the Liverpool v Arsenal game. It does not matter that the player never knew, that his club Liverpool and the opposition never knew, or that the English F A never knew, as far as the SFA were concerned they counted it as a suspension.

I wonder if he played for Liverpool reserves the same day ?

Surely you should have to specify when the suspension is being served?
For squad sheets and suspensions to be listed, then the FA must be notified that the suspension is being taken in order to publicise them?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2010/aug/13/squad-sheets-liverpool-arsenal

[Steve20]

It will have an affect on all of us if hearts don't get the £500,000 it has been reported that reaching the final's worth and they go bust before the end of the season. Party time if this happened.

People need to accept that they aren't going bust. It's just not going to happen.

[Gatecrasher]

Tantalisingly, this link should have the information, but the wayback machine doesnt play well with dynamic pages.
http://web.archive.org/web/20100810155946/http://www.thefa.com/TheFA/Disciplinary/SuspensionLists/PlayersAwaitingSuspension
i can't find an archive at all

[TrinityHibs]

People need to accept that they aren't going bust. It's just not going to happen.

Were you working with HMV just before Christmas when the customer was asking about gift vouchers?:greengrin

[greenginger]

Surely you should have to specify when the suspension is being served?
For squad sheets and suspensions to be listed, then the FA must be notified that the suspension is being taken in order to publicise them?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2010/aug/13/squad-sheets-liverpool-arsenal

I think the SFA would say even if Wilson played against Arsenal that day that he should have been suspended and it is up to the FA to take action against Liverpool.

The fact the suspension only happened in Stuart Regan's head is neither here nor there to the situation as the SFA see it. :confused:

[copycat]

That miss is so bad it almost looks deliberate. I suspect Hertz bribed McKay not to score - knowing how important financially it would be for them to reach the final. Conspiracy! (Discuss.)


Discuss that you are on the wind up with your fishing rod!!!

[Hermit Crab]

Aye ok then, just you let us know what we should and shouldn't focus on regarding our lying cheating sc u m neebors then. Or should we not focus on them at all, because they're not lying cheating sc u m neebors?

ffs

No we should not be focusing on them we have our own problems both on and off the park. We are Hibs!! Sometimes I think posters on here forget this.

[Waxy]

Cannot see them winning the league cup anyway.
Last time they won it their stand was fairly new.(not that we can talk,but i'm saying it anyway).
C'mon St Mirren.

[Hermit Crab]

That miss is so bad it almost looks deliberate. I suspect Hertz bribed McKay not to score - knowing how important financially it would be for them to reach the final. Conspiracy! (Discuss.)

Warning warning!! Do not feed the troll.

[Juice-Terry]

Discuss that you are on the wind up with your fishing rod!!!

That wasn't meant to be taken seriously (which I doubt anybody did anyway). :rolleyes: It was a BAD miss though.

[Dr Hackenbush]

.......what would happen if Hearts get into the top six (with the aid of these new loanees) and then put themselves into administration after the break?

They would lose 18 points but presumably they would finish no lower than sixth ( thus avoiding a possible relegation dogfight)?

Could they then exit administration in time for the new season........and again avoid a meaningful points deduction?

Have the SPL rules to cover this scenario?
I appreciate this may have been covered in the "Financial Meltdown" thread........apologies if it has been (its my first post)!

[Crazyhorse]

People need to accept that they aren't going bust. It's just not going to happen.

I am starting to worry that this is the case. Getting to the League cup final may well just provide the finances to save them unfortunately. Leaving aside the questionable Wilson suspensiongate I blame ICT for blowing it.

[Hermit Crab]

I am starting to worry that this is the case. Getting to the League cup final may well just provide the finances to save them unfortunately. Leaving aside the questionable Wilson suspensiongate I blame ICT for blowing it.

Why is hearts not going bust worrying you?? We are Hibs remember.

[Hibee Ryan]

Why are people so concerned with this??? If he's suspended they'll get what they deserved. Come on this is hitting an embarrassing level! Let ICT deal with it, it's their problem not ours... Has no impact on our season at all

Leave it be guys

[lapsedhibee]

Why are people so concerned with this??? If he's suspended they'll get what they deserved. Come on this is hitting an embarrassing level! Let ICT deal with it, it's their problem not ours... Has no impact on our season at all

Mibbes aye, mibbes naw. But the former is more likely if a big enough stink about it can be maintained.


Leave it be guys
Eh, naw.
:na na:

[Hermit Crab]

Why are people so concerned with this??? If he's suspended they'll get what they deserved. Come on this is hitting an embarrassing level! Let ICT deal with it, it's their problem not ours... Has no impact on our season at all

Leave it be guys

You're telling the boys on this thread to leave it when you are paranoid about Craig Thomson being against Hibs not only in the cup final, but in all other games where he has reffed us. Good one.

[Hibee Ryan]

You're telling the boys on this thread to leave it when you are paranoid about Craig Thomson being against Hibs not only in the cup final, but in all other games where he has reffed us. Good one.

Get over it. Sorry for not agreeing with you. Ill try to in future. No point going on a forum mate if you want everyone to agree with you.

Now try to keep this thread on topic. If you want to talk about this go on the other thread. You didn't answer my questions fully on that thread so I'd like a proper answer now

[Hibee Ryan]

Mibbes aye, mibbes naw. But the former is more likely if a big enough stink about it can be maintained.


Eh, naw.
:na na:

Inverness have done all they need to do! I still doubt Hearts did check with the SFA, why would they? I do believe that something will come of it but to keep talking about it when no one has any answers seems a bit silly

[Hermit Crab]

Get over it. Sorry for not agreeing with you. Ill try to in future. No point going on a forum mate if you want everyone to agree with you.

Now try to keep this thread on topic. If you want to talk about this go on the other thread. You didn't answer my questions fully on that thread so I'd like a proper answer now

Get over the fact that Craig Thomson is not an anti Hibs ref.

[Hibee Ryan]

Get over the fact that Craig Thomson is not an anti Hibs ref.

Get over the fact that it isn't just your opinion that matters. Leave it be mate, this is a completely different thread. Stop being petty

[Pete]

Get over the fact that Craig Thomson is not an anti Hibs ref.

Maybe not this season. He was probably warned after his blatant anti hibs bias which resulted in us being done out of ever coming back into that final.

[greenginger]

Inverness have done all they need to do! I still doubt Hearts did check with the SFA, why would they? I do believe that something will come of it but to keep talking about it when no one has any answers seems a bit silly


Looking at the goings - on at the time of the transfer.

Gordon Smith resigns as SFA Chief-Exec. end of April 2010 and Regan appointed new Chief Exec. 28th July 2010.

The SFA were a shambles when Smith left, and the Association rudderless when Wilson transfer went through. I would'nt be the least surprised if all the right paperwork never went from the SFA to the FA at the time of the transfer.

Come on Mr Butcher use your England credentials to to get to the facts !

[Scouse Hibee]

Looking at the goings - on at the time of the transfer.

Gordon Smith resigns as SFA Chief-Exec. end of April 2010 and Regan appointed new Chief Exec. 28th July 2010.

The SFA were a shambles when Smith left, and the Association rudderless when Wilson transfer went through. I would'nt be the least surprised if all the right paperwork never went from the SFA to the FA at the time of the transfer.

Come on Mr Butcher use your England credentials to to get to the facts !


The chief exec situation surely wouldn't effect a basic clerical issue.

[WindyMiller]

160 GUESTS!

PLUS A FAIR FEW POSTERS WITH LONG MEMBERSHIPS AND LOW POST COUNTS.


If nothing comes of this, at least the admins will be able to clear out a few lurkers.:aok:

[greenginger]

The chief exec situation surely wouldn't effect a basic clerical issue.

When Smith "resigned "the place was a shambles, I doubt the clerks knew what they were meant to do.

[Leithenhibby]

Did Wilson have to miss a "League Cup" game? Can he miss any game to clear the slate, so to speak..... In England or Scotland.... :confused:

[monktonharp]

When Smith "resigned "the place was a shambles, I doubt the clerks knew what they were meant to do.so, it's all ticketyboo now that he's gone, and they've had time to sort things out. thank goodness for that:rolleyes:

[Hermit Crab]

160 GUESTS!

PLUS A FAIR FEW POSTERS WITH LONG MEMBERSHIPS AND LOW POST COUNTS.


If nothing comes of this, at least the admins will be able to clear out a few lurkers.:aok:

This thread is crawling with yams every one of them with itchy index fingers!!

[Hermit Crab]

No it's not,
He is a jambo
FACT

No in not.

[Hermit Crab]

No it's not,
He is a jambo
FACT

.

[Chibs]

I think you're a twat - fact.

Calling me a Jambo. Good one
Ok mate you you are correct I am a twat but I am a hibs twat.
In my defence to much alcohol and not enough brains.
Anyway I apologise for my stupid post but hope you would agree with me that the death of the homofc is something we can both look forward to.
GGTTH

[Hermit Crab]

Ok mate you you are correct I am a twat but I am a hibs twat.
In my defence to much alcohol and not enough brains.
Anyway I apologise for my stupid post but hope you would agree with me that the death of the homofc is something we can both look forward to.
GGTTH

Sorry thought I'd deleted the post in time but must have been too late. No hard feelings mate :-D, GGTTH

[proud_and_green]

It seems quite clear to me that there has been some jiggery pokery at the SFA here and what this underlines - yet again - is the conceit and arrogance that the SFA treat the clubs and fans. They have said no case to answer and we have done everything needed and there is no need to explain our actions.

Obviously depending on how this pans out, this should have serious ramifications for the SFA. If they have got it wrong then there should be a consequence. IF something similar happens in the GOvernment often a Minister resigns and there is an enquiry. The arrogance of the SFA will not see that there was any procedural guilt and that will for me sum up the SFA - don't give a damn about the game, don't give a damn about the fans and only care about perpetuating the system that supports them.

[Cabbage East]

Hermit Crab you do come across as a jambo. Not saying you are, just saying I've read your posts and you seem to play devils advocate constantly. Also, just for info, your opinion is not fact so maybe you should try not to act like it is.

[Hermit Crab]

Hermit Crab you do come across as a jambo. Not saying you are, just saying I've read your posts and you seem to play devils advocate constantly. Also, just for info, your opinion is not fact so maybe you should try not to act like it is.

What posts have you read? The rational ones about the paranoia surrounding Craig Thomson or the other 2690? ;-)

[Sergey]

It looks as though ICT have conceded defeat. This statement has been released be their supporters trust this morning:


Having been in regular contact over the last 24hrs with club chairman, Kenny Cameron, Caley Jags Together would like to assure the fans that all possible steps were taken in looking at the possibility of an error in regards to Danny Wilson's eligibility to participate in last Saturdays League Cup match.

As the arbitrator for disciplinary matters in Scottish Football it is for the SFA to make a final decision, and they have ruled that the player was eligible to participate in the match.

For our part, this was never about seeking reinstatement, a replay or any other such thing and the club were (quite rightly in our opinion) carrying out their duty of care to both the fans and the business by ensuring that they had not been disadvantaged by any oversight.

We appreciate and thank the club for their efforts. Things such as this present an unwelcome distraction for everyone and we extend our thanks to the fans who have (for the most part) conducted their online discussions in a dignified manner.

Our best wishes to both Hearts FC & St Mirren FC who will meet in the final at Hampden on 17th March.

[Mr White]

Come on saints, give me another reason to celebrate paddys day this year!

[SMAXXA]

It looks as though ICT have conceded defeat. This statement has been released be their supporters trust this morning:

Can this thread now be closed, let's move on ICT have.

[Sir David Gray]

I would like to know if Inverness have accepted defeat on the basis that the SFA has presented to them written documentation from the FA that Danny Wilson was in fact suspended for the Liverpool v Arsenal Premiership match in season 2010/11, or whether they have just accepted their word on the matter.

If it's the former then that is fair enough and you can't really argue if that is the case but if it's the latter, I would be taking this all the way and demanding to see the documentation from the FA that states he was suspended for that game as a result of being sent off in the League Cup final for Rangers. The FA should be able to find this information as I'm sure it'll be stored away on a file somewhere. You're only asking them to go back two seasons, it's not as if it happened 15 years ago or anything like that.

It's not going to happen and Inverness have already said that they won't be pursuing the matter any further but I really think they have a case here.

[#FromTheCapital]

Can this thread now be closed, let's move on ICT have.

This. It's getting a bit boring now

[blackpoolhibs]

Not once have i been bored reading this thread. :confused: I think there has been a huge cover up here, and i'd love to see someone delve into this further.

[Saorsa]

Not once have i been bored reading this thread. :confused: I think there has been a huge cover up here, and i'd love to see someone delve into this further.:agree:

[marinello59]

If ICT are happy with the explanation given and have moved on then it's case closed. They were the club directly affected by this. Well done to them for behaving in a dignified manner. We really will make ourselves look like bitter wee men (and women) if we continue to jump up and down shouting "it's not fair."
It was tremendous fun while it lasted though.:greengrin

[lapsedhibee]

If ICT are happy with the explanation given and have moved on then it's case closed. They were the club directly affected by this. Well done to them for behaving in a dignified manner. We really will make ourselves look like bitter wee men (and women) if we continue to jump up and down shouting "it's not fair."
It was tremendous fun while it lasted though.:greengrin

It's a win-win. Some journo now insists on seeing the proper documentation (which probably doesn't exist) and our merriment continues (win) or the issue fades away and the yams are denied a lucrative replay, which knowing their spawn they'd probably win (win).

[blackpoolhibs]

If ICT are happy with the explanation given and have moved on then it's case closed. They were the club directly affected by this. Well done to them for behaving in a dignified manner. We really will make ourselves look like bitter wee men (and women) if we continue to jump up and down shouting "it's not fair."
It was tremendous fun while it lasted though.:greengrin

I am quite small, an admin prick confirmed that to me by PM a while back. :faf: If we were to believe everything those in charge at the top of our game told us, we'd have sevco playing in the SPL now?

If you are happy with their explanation then fine, i'm not and i think its clear others feel the same. All that needs done is the relevant documents are shown to the public, that would suffice?

[Part/Time Supporter]

I would like to know if Inverness have accepted defeat on the basis that the SFA has presented to them written documentation from the FA that Danny Wilson was in fact suspended for the Liverpool v Arsenal Premiership match in season 2010/11, or whether they have just accepted their word on the matter.

If it's the former then that is fair enough and you can't really argue if that is the case but if it's the latter, I would be taking this all the way and demanding to see the documentation from the FA that states he was suspended for that game as a result of being sent off in the League Cup final for Rangers. The FA should be able to find this information as I'm sure it'll be stored away on a file somewhere. You're only asking them to go back two seasons, it's not as if it happened 15 years ago or anything like that.

It's not going to happen and Inverness have already said that they won't be pursuing the matter any further but I really think they have a case here.

I think it is true to say ICT would have a case, but the problem is that now the SFA have made a ruling. The only way ICT could now take it further would be to go outside football and get courts and solicitors involved.

Bear in mind the hostile reaction (old) Rangers got when they went to Court of Session about the transfer embargo. Although Rangers won the legal argument, the SFA ended up imposing the ban anyway through the agreement to let the new Rangers in. This was because FIFA was placing the SFA under pressure to uphold their ruling and not be dictated to by a civil court.

Something similar could have happened here. ICT go to Court of Session, who grant an interdict against the SFL staging the cup final and order the governing bodies to re-examine the issue. They then either oppose the court or FIFA => major problem. Basically it's not worth the hassle to ICT, once the SFA have made their ruling.

[Golden Bear]

I think it is true to say ICT would have a case, but the problem is that now the SFA have made a ruling. The only way ICT could now take it further would be to go outside football and get courts and solicitors involved.

Bear in mind the hostile reaction (old) Rangers got when they went to Court of Session about the transfer embargo. Although Rangers won the legal argument, the SFA ended up imposing the ban anyway through the agreement to let the new Rangers in. This was because FIFA was placing the SFA under pressure to uphold their ruling and not be dictated to by a civil court.

Something similar could have happened here. ICT go to Court of Session, who grant an interdict against the SFL staging the cup final and order the governing bodies to re-examine the issue. They then either oppose the court or FIFA => major problem.


And we'll end up getting this year's final played in season 2019/2020

:wink:

[greenginger]

I think it is true to say ICT would have a case, but the problem is that now the SFA have made a ruling. The only way ICT could now take it further would be to go outside football and get courts and solicitors involved.

Bear in mind the hostile reaction (old) Rangers got when they went to Court of Session about the transfer embargo. Although Rangers won the legal argument, the SFA ended up imposing the ban anyway through the agreement to let the new Rangers in. This was because FIFA was placing the SFA under pressure to uphold their ruling and not be dictated to by a civil court.

Something similar could have happened here. ICT go to Court of Session, who grant an interdict against the SFL staging the cup final and order the governing bodies to re-examine the issue. They then either oppose the court or FIFA => major problem. Basically it's not worth the hassle to ICT, once the SFA have made their ruling.


If Inverness want to take it further it should be to the EUFA court of Arbitation for Sport. Can't see it though I'm afraid.

[Hermit Crab]

:agree:

This has nothing to do with us! Time to move on.

[Sir David Gray]

I think it is true to say ICT would have a case, but the problem is that now the SFA have made a ruling. The only way ICT could now take it further would be to go outside football and get courts and solicitors involved.

Bear in mind the hostile reaction (old) Rangers got when they went to Court of Session about the transfer embargo. Although Rangers won the legal argument, the SFA ended up imposing the ban anyway through the agreement to let the new Rangers in. This was because FIFA was placing the SFA under pressure to uphold their ruling and not be dictated to by a civil court.

Something similar could have happened here. ICT go to Court of Session, who grant an interdict against the SFL staging the cup final and order the governing bodies to re-examine the issue. They then either oppose the court or FIFA => major problem. Basically it's not worth the hassle to ICT, once the SFA have made their ruling.

I totally understand that and I agree it would be a minefield if they turned it into a legal matter.

However all I'm saying they should do is request a copy of the original documentation from the FA that states Danny Wilson was suspended for the Liverpool v Arsenal game in August 2010. If they can do that then it really is case closed and everyone can move on.

I was hoping to do this myself but I've not had time to do any kind of research, but has anyone else done any searching to find if this kind of thing has come up before in previous years, whereby a player in Scotland gets sent off in a competition, which is his club's last match in that competition before he moves to England for a couple of years, and he then serves his suspension whilst down there and is then free to play in his first match in that competition on his return to Scotland?

Not sure if it has cropped up before but it would be interesting to find out.

[Saorsa]

This has nothing to do with us! Time to move on.I'll decide what I do and when I do it, not you. You seem tae have great difficulty with anyone having an opinion/views that differ from yours, are you a union rep?

[JimBHibees]

This has nothing to do with us! Time to move on.

Nonsense. It has everything to with Hibs IMO. Our city rivals are strengthened and emboldened both financially and playing wise by being able to play players they cant afford, progressing in cups and now getting to a final possibly on the back of playing an ineligible player.

[lapsedhibee]

This has nothing to do with us!

If the SFA are lying (again) it has plenty to do with us and every other club. If they're not, they can verily easily demonstrate they're not.

[marinello59]

I am quite small, an admin prick confirmed that to me by PM a while back. :faf: If we were to believe everything those in charge at the top of our game told us, we'd have sevco playing in the SPL now?

If you are happy with their explanation then fine, i'm not and i think its clear others feel the same. All that needs done is the relevant documents are shown to the public, that would suffice?

They haven't explained anything to me, they explained it to ICT. IF they are happy with that and are not seeking recompense then that will do me. Like I said, fun while it lasted but now I will turn my attention to hoping St Mirren paste them in the final.
By the way BH, I would never describe you as small.:greengrin

[marinello59]

If the SFA are lying (again) it has plenty to do with us and every other club. If they're not, they can verily easily demonstrate they're not.

Is there the same clamour for action from the fans of every other club? I don't see it. Why do you think that is?

[lapsedhibee]

Is there the same clamour for action from the fans of every other club? I don't see it. Why do you think that is?

We are smarter?

May have started off as a local rivalry thing, but it's now for me about SFA procedures. Bit more digging and the whole thing can be put to bed. My guess is they've lied/made up a story, but I don't know that.

[blackpoolhibs]

They haven't explained anything to me, they explained it to ICT. IF they are happy with that and are not seeking recompense then that will do me. Like I said, fun while it lasted but now I will turn my attention to hoping St Mirren paste them in the final.
By the way BH, I would never describe you as small.:greengrin

Yip they have explained it to ICT, but personally I feel they need to be seen these days to be whiter than white. And all that needs done is the documents produced for all those that are interested to see. It should be easy enough to do, and would clear this all up for everyone. And yip nobody else has ever called me a midget before lol.

[Keith_M]

I can't see that Hearts have actually done anything wrong. As far as all the relevant football bodies are concerned, the guy was eligible to play.

The game isn't going to be replayed and no action is going to be taken against Hearts. Like it or not, they're in the Final.



As an aside, what's with all the paranoia on here over anyone that doesn't toe the party line?

[RyeSloan]

I can't see that Hearts have actually done anything wrong. As far as all the relevant football bodies are concerned, the guy was eligible to play.

The game isn't going to be replayed and no action is going to be taken against Hearts. Like it or not, they're in the Final.



As an aside, what's with all the paranoia on here over anyone that doesn't toe the party line?


Which party line?

The one in which people are free to ask questions and to continue to ask for documentary evidence that the footballing governing body has not covered up their own mistake?

Or the party line in which others decide what people should be questioning on a football forum and comparing them to paranoid celtic fans or brokeback?

[Monts]

Heres my tuppence worth

I think everyone is focusing on the wrong issue here with regards to the evidence needed to be shown by the SFA. There is no need for them to prove that he was suspended for the Arsenal game. As long as they can show that they provided the notice that Wilson had a pending suspension when he moved to Liverpool then it is then out of their hands.

Once the suspension has been passed onto the FA it is up to them to ensure it is enforced. The only way it would become the SFAs problem again is if he moved back to Scotland without ever being eligble for a game in England.

If it turns out he wasnt suspended for the Arsenal game then it is the FA who have erred and I suppose Arsenal could complain. But since he never made the squad anyway then they are not going to bat an eyelid.

He was clear to play in the semi.

[lapsedhibee]

I think everyone is focusing on the wrong issue here with regards to the evidence needed to be shown by the SFA. There is no need for them to prove that he was suspended for the Arsenal game.

You may be right with your general argument, but haven't the SFA specifically said that he was suspended for the Arsenal game? Why would they say that if there was no evidence that he was suspended for that game?

[Hermit Crab]

I'll decide what I do and when I do it, not you. You seem tae have great difficulty with anyone having an opinion/views that differ from yours, are you a union rep?

Never said I decide when and what you do. I said its not our business time to move on. We slag hearts for being obsessed with us right. Between this and the Craig Thomson thread is that not obsession?

Also DD good guess, yes I am a union rep :-D

[Monts]

You may be right with your general argument, but haven't the SFA specifically said that he was suspended for the Arsenal game? Why would they say that if there was no evidence that he was suspended for that game?

They way I read it was they were saying he had a suspension to serve in England, and then they gave the game he should have been suspended for.

[Hermit Crab]

Nonsense. It has everything to with Hibs IMO. Our city rivals are strengthened and emboldened both financially and playing wise by being able to play players they cant afford, progressing in cups and now getting to a final possibly on the back of playing an ineligible player.

What did hearts do wrong? They checked with the respective authorities. How would we feel if it was Hibs who were in this situation and other clubs stuck their nose in.

[Hermit Crab]

If the SFA are lying (again) it has plenty to do with us and every other club. If they're not, they can verily easily demonstrate they're not.

Do you see the other nine clubs making noise over this?? No and its mainly just folk on here that are worried about it. the other clubs are not interested as there's nothing in it.

[Saorsa]

Never said I decide when and what you do. I said its not our business time to move on. We slag hearts for being obsessed with us right. Between this and the Craig Thomson thread is that not obsession?

Also DD good guess, yes I am a union rep :-DI dinnae slag h****s for being obsessed though, I just slag/hate h****s period :wink: and I want tae see them suffer any/every misfortune possible and then some, dinnae think I've ever hidden that.

I'll no tell you how I guessed you were a union rep :wink:

[lapsedhibee]

Do you see the other nine clubs making noise over this?? No because they are not interested as there's nothing in it.

I didn't see the other nine clubs making noise about Tattoo Man's recent assault on McPake. Some people, notably Tattoo Man himself and Fester "John" McGlynn, insisted there was nothing in it. Yet he was retrospectively suspended, on the basis of evidence presented.

[Hermit Crab]

I dinnae slag h****s for being obsessed though, I just slag/hate h****s :wink: and I want tae see them suffer any/every misfortune possible and then some, dinnae think I've ever hidden that.

I'll no tell you how I guessed you were a union rep :wink:

I'm pretty sure I don't want to know how you guessed. In my view this thread and the Thomson thread comes over as obsession. Just saying.

[brog]

Never said I decide when and what you do. I said its not our business time to move on. We slag hearts for being obsessed with us right. Between this and the Craig Thomson thread is that not obsession?

Also DD good guess, yes I am a union rep :-D

You seem paranoiac about Hibs fans being paranoiac!! :wink: My remedy for threads that annoy me is to avoid reading them, its really quite simple.

[Hermit Crab]

I didn't see the other nine clubs making noise about Tattoo Man's recent assault on McPake. Some people, notably Tattoo Man himself and Fester "John" McGlynn, insisted there was nothing in it. Yet he was retrospectively suspended, on the basis of evidence presented.

That's because it's got hee haw to do with the other clubs as has this situation. On the basis of the evidence presented to Inverness there was no breach of rules here.

[#FromTheCapital]

I dinnae slag h****s for being obsessed though, I just slag/hate h****s period :wink: and I want tae see them suffer any/every misfortune possible and then some, dinnae think I've ever hidden that.

I'll no tell you how I guessed you were a union rep :wink:

:aok: You certainly have not :greengrin

I also get pissed off with this whole obsession pish. We are hibs and they are Hearts, as long as I've lived we have hated each other and always take pleasure in each others misfortune. Nowt to do with being obsessed.

[lapsedhibee]

That's because it's got hee haw to do with the other clubs as has this situation. On the basis of the evidence presented to Inverness there was no breach of rules here.

What evidence? :confused:

[JimBHibees]

What did hearts do wrong? They checked with the respective authorities. How would we feel if it was Hibs who were in this situation and other clubs stuck their nose in.

They may have played an ineligible player to get to the final that they cant afford, in a game which their goal was scored by a guy they cant afford. They won the Scottish cup last year playing players they cant afford including outbidding St Mirren for Beattie who they couldnt afford to pay who scored a goal helping them knock out St Mirren and also scoring the winning goal in the semi.

I am amazed any Hibs fan isnt a little concerned by any of that.

[Hermit Crab]

They may have played an ineligible player to get to the final that they cant afford, in a game which their goal was scored by a guy they cant afford. They won the Scottish cup last year playing players they cant afford including outbidding St Mirren for Beattie who they couldnt afford to pay who scored a goal helping them knock out St Mirren and also scoring the winning goal in the semi.

I am amazed any Hibs fan isnt a little concerned by any of that.

That just comes across as jealousy mate. Did we not put ourselves into debt when we were in the first division just to get out of it?

[JimBHibees]

Do you see the other nine clubs making noise over this?? No and its mainly just folk on here that are worried about it. the other clubs are not interested as there's nothing in it.

I am sure Hibs as a club are making no noises about it however I would think most fans of other clubs would be at least interested in teams getting to finals when they maybe shouldnt have.

[Hermit Crab]

What evidence? :confused:

That's between the SFA and Inverness

[JimBHibees]

That just comes across as jealousy mate. Did we not put ourselves into debt when we were in the first division just to get out of it?

Huge difference between putting ourselves in debt and NOT being able to pay for players who influence matches to the detriment of others. It is cheating pure and simple.

[Mr White]

That just comes across as jealousy mate. Did we not put ourselves into debt when we were in the first division just to get out of it?
everyone got paid and on time though didn't they?

[Judas Iscariot]

That's between the SFA and Inverness

What? The trustworthy SPL "telling" ICT DW has served his ban?

[lapsedhibee]

That's between the SFA and Inverness

SFA have given Inverness a ruling, is what I read. No mention of any evidence. Given their appalling track record with The Sevco during 2012, it's probably at least as likely that their ruling is simply made up rather than being based on consideration of evidence. Yams can fluke their way to another cup win, which they probably will, and good luck to them :fibber: but it's high time the jokers in the governing bodies had rockets up their jacksies.

[Just_Jimmy]

My issue is how came a suspention in the scottish league cup carries to the english league cup?

Its different governing bodies and competions.

If you get sent off in the english cup do you miss the next champions league game etc?

The whole thing stinks but since its them no one cares. If it was spartans etc theyd be binned.

[Monts]

My issue is how came a suspention in the scottish league cup carries to the english league cup?

Its different governing bodies and competions.

If you get sent off in the english cup do you miss the next champions league game etc?

The whole thing stinks but since its them no one cares. If it was spartans etc theyd be binned.

It didnt carry from the Scottish League Cup to the English League Cup, it carried with the player to his next domestic match as there was a possibility that he would never play in a Scottish League Cup match again. If it didnt carry over then there is no disincentive for players not to get sent off if they already know they are leaving a team.

This is a situation regarding a cross border transfer so the champions league scenario is irrelevant, as the likelyhood is that player will be available to play in the next 'english cup' game for the same team.

[cocopops1875]

Is there the same clamour for action from the fans of every other club? I don't see it. Why do you think that is?

Because they don't stand to benefit from the hire of their stadium for a replay ?

[danhibees1875]

Is there the same clamour for action from the fans of every other club? I don't see it. Why do you think that is?

We hate the Hearts. :aok:

I've a lot more interest in pissing off Hearts than I do 'seeking fair play', although that's nice too. But it's mostly the Hearts thing. :greengrin

[Saorsa]

Is there the same clamour for action from the fans of every other club? I don't see it. Why do you think that is?I'll not deny my delight at seeing any misfortune befall that grubby cheating, stealing club, (there'd be nae point :wink: ) but I also like tae see the SFA put under the spotlight as they are IMO as untrustworthy and incompetent an organisation as you're likely tae find. I'd liked tae have seen the right thing done and tae be seen tae have been done. I firmly believe somebody, most likely the SFA has made a balls up and are trying tae cover it up and as they seem tae be the judge and jury with the final say I guess they can get away with it. If there was nae mistake I'd like tae see the evidence because I wouldnae trust that shower of shysters at the SFA as far as I could throw a grand piano.

[green is good]

The yams must have thought there was a possibility that Wilson had a ban to serve or they surely wouldn't have asked if he was eligible to play.

[StevieC]

The yams must have thought there was a possibility that Wilson had a ban to serve or they surely wouldn't have asked if he was eligible to play.

That's my thinking.

My guess is that Wilson has never served a ban, for whatever reason, and he passed this information on to Hearts. Somebody, somewhere has made a mistake but the problem is who and why?

The ITC that was passed to the FA is critical because it will state the suspension details, and if this states SCOTTISH League Cup specific then that might explain why it was never served. Finding a copy of that is probably pretty slim though and, to be honest, unless it affected a team in England there's really no need for the FA to go hunting for it (or say if a ban was served for that matter). As he had no ENGLISH suspensions when he returned to Scotland then the ITC would (quite rightly?) say no suspensions.

Either way, Inverness (who are the injured party) have decided to let it go so even if it is a cover up by the SFA/SPL/SFL then it's one that they've got away with.

[Keith_M]

Which party line?

The one in which people are free to ask questions and to continue to ask for documentary evidence that the footballing governing body has not covered up their own mistake?

Or the party line in which others decide what people should be questioning on a football forum and comparing them to paranoid celtic fans or brokeback?


No, in fact the complete opposite. What I'm referring to is anyone that doesn't say something overtly anti-Hearts or puts over a point of view that attempts to make a reasoned point is attacked as a Yam lover. THAT party line.

Sorry if this offends you but I think that's pathetic. I have no love whatsoever for anything about Hearts but I reserve the right not to make rabid, un-informed opinions on something they may or may not have done just because it's the popular thing to do.

[Dashing Bob S]

No, in fact the complete opposite. What I'm referring to is anyone that doesn't say something overtly anti-Hearts or puts over a point of view that attempts to make a reasoned point is attacked as a Yam lover. THAT party line.

Sorry if this offends you but I think that's pathetic. I have no love whatsoever for anything about Hearts but I reserve the right not to make rabid, un-informed opinions on something they may or may not have done just because it's the popular thing to do.

You were doing so well until 'I reserve the right...'

[Sir David Gray]

It didnt carry from the Scottish League Cup to the English League Cup, it carried with the player to his next domestic match as there was a possibility that he would never play in a Scottish League Cup match again. If it didnt carry over then there is no disincentive for players not to get sent off if they already know they are leaving a team.

This is a situation regarding a cross border transfer so the champions league scenario is irrelevant, as the likelyhood is that player will be available to play in the next 'english cup' game for the same team.

No it didn't.

Wilson appeared 3 days after that red card, for Rangers against Dundee Utd in the Scottish Cup.

[ronaldo7]

I'm glad Danny played to be honest. He put in a great shift at the back with Webby:greengrin

[DarrenSQH]

Cheats never win

[Hibby Kay-Yay]

Cheats never win

A certain 5-1 game goes against that view

[Bleeds green]

Remember the furore when they signed him? 'Fantastic signing' supposedly!! Well since that day he's helped a yams defence leak 23 goals in 12 games, and to think Liverpool paid £2mil for him

UNBELIEVABLE JEFF

[The_Exile]

A certain 5-1 game goes against that view

True, but in 50 years their grandchildren will be Hibs supporters, that's bigger than any cup final result, even if it was 10-0.

[lapsedhibee]

True, but in 50 years their grandchildren will be Hibs supporters, that's bigger than any cup final result, even if it was 10-0.

50 years is at least three generations of yams, not two, so great-grandchildren. :wink:

[blindsummit]

50 years is at least three generations of yams, not two, so great-grandchildren. :wink:

Depends whether they sleep with their mother or sister :greengrin

[essexhibee]

Was pish on Sunday. :thumbsup:

[lapsedhibee]

Depends whether they sleep with their mother or sister :greengrin

Yams like younger, so it would usually be the sister - except in all those cases where the sister is older than the mother. :greengrin