One rule for Hearts.....

[Billy Whizz]

And another one for every other team

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/47945447

[matty_f]

That's a disgrace, I honestly hate things like that. Fair enough if the powers that be were trolling Hearts knowing that as it was the league cup they'd just **** up anyway, but it should be the same for everyone.

[Billy Whizz]

That's a disgrace, I honestly hate things like that. Fair enough if the powers that be were trolling Hearts knowing that as it was the league cup they'd just **** up anyway, but it should be the same for everyone.

Think the Hearts one was issued by SPFL, and the Clyde one by SFA
Rules for each should be the same though

[blackpoolhibs]

The authorities don't give a toss that they are blatantly cheating now, the game is corrupt to the core. :rolleyes:

[green day]

Think the Hearts one was issued by SPFL, and the Clyde one by SFA
Rules for each should be the same though

According to the BBC report above, it was an SPFL sanction, albeit upheld on appeal to the SFA.

Good statement by Clyde though:greengrin

[Aim Here]

Think the Hearts one was issued by SPFL, and the Clyde one by SFA
Rules for each should be the same though

Other way around, surely. The Clyde one was for league games, the Hearts was for the League Cup.

The Clyde decision is the right one, in that any club not fielding an eligible, legitimate team for a competitive match should be hit with an automatic 3-0 forfeit, no questions asked, the same way that a goal scored by the striker handling the ball is disallowed. Any advantage you get from breaking the rules should be nullified - and it's only sanctions above and beyond that forfeit that would be punishments.

The one special case is perhaps Fort William in the Lowland League, where they got docked 3 points rather than a mere forfeit over their three infringements, but that might be because the team is so bad that losing 3-0 is a far-above-average result for them. You kindof have to go into negative points just to disincentivise them!

[green day]

Other way around, surely. The Clyde one was for league games, the Hearts was for the League Cup.

The Clyde decision is the right one, in that any club not fielding an eligible, legitimate team for a competitive match should be hit with an automatic 3-0 forfeit, no questions asked, the same way that a goal scored by the striker handling the ball is disallowed. Any advantage you get from breaking the rules should be nullified - and it's only sanctions above and beyond that forfeit that would be punishments.

The one special case is perhaps Fort William in the Lowland League, where they got docked 3 points rather than a mere forfeit over their three infringements, but that might be because the team is so bad that losing 3-0 is a far-above-average result for them. You kindof have to go into negative points just to disincentivise them!

Which is an SPFL competition

[Ozyhibby]

Hibs must be happy with the way the rules are applied favourably towards certain teams or they would say so. It’s a mystery to me why we don’t seem to mind?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[NadeAteMyLunch!]

Still absolutely mental that Hearts played an ineligible player, won the game and got awarded 3 points, then got 2 points deducted.
As Clyde’s statement says, they were effectively awarded a point for playing an ineligible player. Incredible decision that was done purely so they could still qualify with a win in their televised game against ICT a few days later.
Scottish fitbaw eh

[Smartie]

Hibs must be happy with the way the rules are applied favourably towards certain teams or they would say so. It’s a mystery to me why we don’t seem to mind?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Hibs are the ultimate "I'm alright Jack" club.

If we were on the sharp end of any of these decisions then there would be uproar.

If Scottish football ever wants to evolve, it could start by applying the rules consistently. It's not difficult.

I agree with the point above, that Clyde actually deserved to be docked the points and shouldn't have any complaints about that fact alone. It is the fact that precedent seems to be dispensed with whenever it is convenient to go easy on certain clubs that Clyde will have thought they had any grounds for appeal.

Our authorities are a disgrace, and their lack of credibility detracts from the achievement of actually winning anything in Scotland.

[The 90+2]

One game scheduled for BT sports in a comp they would have been out of one for a lower league team.

[Argylehibby]

Hibs must be happy with the way the rules are applied favourably towards certain teams or they would say so. It’s a mystery to me why we don’t seem to mind?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

How many clubs other than Clyde are complaining? Is it not a mystery to you that nobody else complains or just that Hibs don't?

[Smartie]

How many clubs other than Clyde are complaining? Is it not a mystery to you that nobody else complains or just that Hibs don't?

I think it's a bit poor that it only ever seems to be the wronged club, usually a wee club, who complain.

This sort of stuff doesn't do anyone in Scottish football any favours.

I only assume that Hibs would hope that if they found themselves breaking the rules that they'd manage to wriggle out of it with minimal punishment as certain other clubs seem to be able to, therefore they don't see the injustice here?

[green day]

Hibs are the ultimate "I'm alright Jack" club.

If we were on the sharp end of any of these decisions then there would be uproar.

If Scottish football ever wants to evolve, it could start by applying the rules consistently. It's not difficult.

I agree with the point above, that Clyde actually deserved to be docked the points and shouldn't have any complaints about that fact alone. It is the fact that precedent seems to be dispensed with whenever it is convenient to go easy on certain clubs that Clyde will have thought they had any grounds for appeal.

Our authorities are a disgrace, and their lack of credibility detracts from the achievement of actually winning anything in Scotland.

Are all clubs not the same?

How many other clubs released statements when Hearts were dealt with in a more lenient manner?

How exactly are Hibs "The Ultimate I'm alright Jack Club" ??????

While I dont disagree that Hearts appear to have been dealt with in an inconsistent manner, it never ceases to amaze me how people contrive to make SPFL or SFA cockups "Hibs fault" or "Petries fault".

Its boring and usually wrong.

As for your last sentence - was our Scottish cup win in 2016 a lesser achievement?

[Argylehibby]

I think it's a bit poor that it only ever seems to be the wronged club, usually a wee club, who complain.

This sort of stuff doesn't do anyone in Scottish football any favours.

I only assume that Hibs would hope that if they found themselves breaking the rules that they'd manage to wriggle out of it with minimal punishment as certain other clubs seem to be able to, therefore they don't see the injustice here?

I agree it doesn't do anyone any favours. and I suspect that Hibs do see the injustice but choose to say nothing. If they did speak out would it make anything better for Clyde or for others in the future? Do we really want them to fight everyone else's battles for them mif everyone else says nothing?

Ozzy makes a point of singling out Hibs for not saying anything when no other club has piped up either. If the point being made was anything other than a dig at the club then the question would have been phrased around whey all other clubs sit quietly.

If these types of decision are to be stopped than some channel for the clubs to express their disapproval needs to be available (it may exist already) but one club standing up on their own and making statements in the press will achieve nothing.

[Smartie]

Are all clubs not the same?

How many other clubs released statements when Hearts were dealt with in a more lenient manner?

How exactly are Hibs "The Ultimate I'm alright Jack Club" ??????

While I dont disagree that Hearts appear to have been dealt with in an inconsistent manner, it never ceases to amaze me how people contrive to make SPFL or SFA cockups "Hibs fault" or "Petries fault".

Its boring and usually wrong.

As for your last sentence - was our Scottish cup win in 2016 a lesser achievement?

I think that the credibility of any competition is compromised when rules are applied so inconsistently.

The authorities are largely made up by the clubs, so rather than blame a faceless blazer, we will know who within our club is doing our bidding at that level. I think that's why it is easier to blame someone closer to home when in reality they are just a small part of the problem.

Personally I just don't like to see a wee club like Clyde on the wrong end of this inconsistency. It is not good for Scottish football, and I don't think there are many people who have the interests of Scottish football at heart. They just get on with advancing what is best for their club, Hibs have always done this. To be fair your point stands, they are not unusual in this respect.

Re the Scottish Cup - that's a bit of a sneaky one, and I don't want to think of it as tainted. I don't want to think of anything any club achieves as being tainted, therefore robust and consistent application of rules should be expected - rules that apply to our club as much as anyone.

[Ozyhibby]

I agree it doesn't do anyone any favours. and I suspect that Hibs do see the injustice but choose to say nothing. If they did speak out would it make anything better for Clyde or for others in the future? Do we really want them to fight everyone else's battles for them mif everyone else says nothing?

Ozzy makes a point of singling out Hibs for not saying anything when no other club has piped up either. If the point being made was anything other than a dig at the club then the question would have been phrased around whey all other clubs sit quietly.

If these types of decision are to be stopped than some channel for the clubs to express their disapproval needs to be available (it may exist already) but one club standing up on their own and making statements in the press will achieve nothing.

I’m a Hibs fan. I care most about what Hibs do and the way Hibs behave. I believe it’s in our long term interests to be a club that stands for fairness. I’m not saying these things because I want to attack Hibs, I’m saying it because I think we should be doing more than we are. I want us to be a club that is looking to improve the way the game is run in Scotland. Right now, I don’t think we are.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[calumhibee1]

Don’t care about the whole different association thing, the fact Hearts gained a point while fielding an ineligible player was ridiculous. Clyde have been punished correctly, I can see why they’re moaning though.

[Here’s Lucy!]

Effectively, both Hearts and Clyde cheated.

Effectively, Hearts got away with it, albeit partly.

[SunshineOnLeith]

It's a conspiracy.

[Bostonhibby]

Effectively, both Hearts and Clyde cheated.

Effectively, Hearts got away with it, albeit partly.It's the hearts way, they're just better at the dark arts of manipulation than most and are absolutely shameless about the consequences.

Sent from my SM-A750FN using Tapatalk

[Sammy7nil]

Effectively, both Hearts and Clyde cheated.

Effectively, Hearts got away with it, albeit partly.

More than a bit harsh on Clyde they probably have a part time Secretary who forgot to send an e mail i think cheating is a bit strong. On the other hand Hearts probably have a team of admin staff with checks in place. I still think cheating even for them is a too harsh. Yes there should be a punishment but make it for the crime.

[Smartie]

More than a bit harsh on Clyde they probably have a part time Secretary who forgot to send an e mail i think cheating is a bit strong. On the other hand Hearts probably have a team of admin staff with checks in place. I still think cheating even for them is a too harsh. Yes there should be a punishment but make it for the crime.

The punishment for stuff like this needs to be pretty robust and consistent though, otherwise what is there to stop some of the nation's less scrupulous teams trampling all over them and taking the piss?

I used to think the harsh punishments for fielding ineligible players was unjust, but I've changed my mind.

We're talking about professional sport. It shouldn't be too much to ask for big businesses to have their registration paperwork in order. Its nothing new.

[Sammy7nil]

The punishment for stuff like this needs to be pretty robust and consistent though, otherwise what is there to stop some of the nation's less scrupulous trampling all over them and taking the piss?

I used to think the harsh punishments for fielding ineligible players was unjust, but I've changed my mind.

We're talking about professional sport. It shouldn't be too much to ask for big businesses to have their registration paperwork in order. Its nothing new.

I agree but do Clyde really have the resources to be totally on top of this? I think that was just a genuine mistake was he not their player anyway and had only been out on loan.

[Ozyhibby]

I agree but do Clyde really have the resources to be totally on top of this? I think that was just a genuine mistake was he not their player anyway and had only been out on loan.

I coach u13’s football and if we field an ineligible player then we would immediately forfeit the game. We are very careful that we don’t. Clyde have the resources to make sure they don’t as well.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Bishop Hibee]

Hertz. Cheats then, cheats now, cheats in the future. The real meaning of ‘Gorgie rules’.

[Smartie]

I agree but do Clyde really have the resources to be totally on top of this? I think that was just a genuine mistake was he not their player anyway and had only been out on loan.

They should have the resources. Amateur clubs, boys clubs, junior clubs, senior clubs all have the resources to stay on top of things and they understand the consequences if they don't.

I appreciate that it was probably a genuine mistake but rules are rules.

If you accepted that reasoning, could you imagine how many "genuine mistakes" Sevco would be coming away with expecting the same lenient treatment?

[PatHead]

They should have the resources. Amateur clubs, boys clubs, junior clubs, senior clubs all have the resources to stay on top of things and they understand the consequences if they don't.

I appreciate that it was probably a genuine mistake but rules are rules.

If you accepted that reasoning, could you imagine how many "genuine mistakes" Sevco would be coming away with expecting the same lenient treatment?

Think you will find out sevco's predecessor did.

[Here’s Lucy!]

More than a bit harsh on Clyde they probably have a part time Secretary who forgot to send an e mail i think cheating is a bit strong. On the other hand Hearts probably have a team of admin staff with checks in place. I still think cheating even for them is a too harsh. Yes there should be a punishment but make it for the crime.

You're right to a degree.

But, as the bits of your post I have highlighted proves, nobody actually knows.

So, if we agree Hearts cheated, then we have to agree that Clyde did likewise.

I personally think that neither did, to be honest.

[Billy Whizz]

You're right to a degree.

But, as the bits of your post I have highlighted proves, nobody actually knows.

So, if we agree Hearts cheated, then we have to agree that Clyde did likewise.

I personally think that neither did, to be honest.

I don’t think either did too, but the punishments are different, which is what Clyde’s beef is about

[G B Young]

Still absolutely mental that Hearts played an ineligible player, won the game and got awarded 3 points, then got 2 points deducted.
As Clyde’s statement says, they were effectively awarded a point for playing an ineligible player. Incredible decision that was done purely so they could still qualify with a win in their televised game against ICT a few days later.
Scottish fitbaw eh

That's correct. The TV game was already scheduled so they didn't want to lose the money coming into the game from the broadcasters and nor did they want a 'big' club to go out of the competition so early. A decision was therefore taken to make it look as though a sanction had been imposed, despite they fact nobody could cite a precedent or explain the justification for a two-point deduction.

Jim McInally summed it up well:

https://www.eveningexpress.co.uk/fp/sport/football/scottish-football/mcinally-fury-over-penalty-for-jambos-unlisted-sub/

The fact the yams went on to benefit from a big Murrayfield crowd in their semi-final gubbing by Celtic sticks in the craw.

[TheHarpy76]

Hibs must be happy with the way the rules are applied favourably towards certain teams or they would say so. It’s a mystery to me why we don’t seem to mind?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Why would we bother?

Neither situation effects us in any way whatsoever. If it was a decision that had a negative effect on us, then I’m sure we would have something to say.

Let’s be honest, if it was St Johnstone or Livingston that got away fairly Scot free in the league cup, then this thread probably wouldn’t exist.

I can’t say I give much of a toss about either situation.

[Viva_Palmeiras]

Precedent set for the “big clubs” job done, nothing to see move on...

[we are hibs]

No sympathy for Clyde. Horrible club

[JimBHibees]

No sympathy for Clyde. Horrible club

Why?

[blackpoolhibs]

Why would we bother?

Neither situation effects us in any way whatsoever. If it was a decision that had a negative effect on us, then I’m sure we would have something to say.

Let’s be honest, if it was St Johnstone or Livingston that got away fairly Scot free in the league cup, then this thread probably wouldn’t exist.

I can’t say I give much of a toss about either situation.

How does their progression in the cup, with all the financial benefits that entail have no effect on us?

What happened to Rods sporting integrity mantra there?

You just cant make the rules up as you go along, sorry thats a lie, you can in Scotland. :rolleyes:

[ian cruise]

I know someone involved in that league, it wasn't deliberate but rather than being that Clyde forgot to send something, it was more along the lines of they just assumed it would be OK as he was in their books and didn't take the time to look in to the rules regarding short term loans and player registration before hand. Bit rough but ignorance is no excuse in the eyes of the law.

Agree the Hearts should have been similarly punished earlier in the season but that doesn't mean you shouldn't apply the rules correctly to Clyde. Hopefully (though unlikely) it sets a precident for the rules being correctly applied going forward.

[Moulin Yarns]

It's a conspiracy.

Or it might be a witch hunt

https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/sport/1548348/fort-william-boss-kris-anderson-feels-club-are-victims-of-a-witch-hunt-after-points-deduction/

[TheHarpy76]

How does their progression in the cup, with all the financial benefits that entail have no effect on us?

What happened to Rods sporting integrity mantra there?

You just cant make the rules up as you go along, sorry thats a lie, you can in Scotland. :rolleyes:

Ok, I’ll give you that.

What about the rest of my post though. No one would give a **** if it was St Johnstone or Livi.

[blackpoolhibs]

Ok, I’ll give you that.

What about the rest of my post though. No one would give a **** if it was St Johnstone or Livi.

I do and so should everyone else, how can you break the rules and have no idea what punishment you will receive?

Playing ANY ineligible player should automatically result in a 3-0 defeat and the loss of 3 points, no matter how small or large the team is conceived to be.

Sporting integrity should be there for all teams.

[JimBHibees]

I do and so should everyone else, how can you break the rules and have no idea what punishment you will receive?

Playing ANY ineligible player should automatically result in a 3-0 defeat and the loss of 3 points, no matter how small or large the team is conceived to be.

Sporting integrity should be there for all teams.

Yet we were clearly told the new spfl rules would be very clear as would punishments. Utter shambles this has been allowed to happen. Hearts benefitted hugely by getting a split of 50k crowd at Murrayfield. Very surprised how little Inverness made of it at the time.

[Smartie]

Ok, I’ll give you that.

What about the rest of my post though. No one would give a **** if it was St Johnstone or Livi.

I'd care if it was St Johnstone or Livi.

I care most if it is our rivals for league position and in cups. Hearts will have benefitted to the tune of a few hundred grand from that decision, money that will allow them to hold an advantage over Hibs.

It would bother me similarly if it was Killie or Aberdeen who had benefitted.

[jgl07]

Why?

1958 Cup Final:

Clyde 1: Hibernian 0

[silverhibee]

And in other news Celtc won't be punished for there fans singing sectarian songs because they issued a statement to the Celtc fans after the game saying they were bad songs and not to sing them, SFA happy with that and no further action will be taken against them.

[we are hibs]

Why?

They have a rapist upfront and a racist in midfield.

[green day]

How does their progression in the cup, with all the financial benefits that entail have no effect on us?

What happened to Rods sporting integrity mantra there?

You just cant make the rules up as you go along, sorry thats a lie, you can in Scotland. :rolleyes:

SPFL decision - was nothing to do with Petrie

[blackpoolhibs]

SPFL decision - was nothing to do with Petrie

He made the statement on behalf of Hibs and Scottish football, yet nothing since when these things happen?:rolleyes:

[green day]

He made the statement on behalf of Hibs and Scottish football, yet nothing since when these things happen?:rolleyes:

We may have to disagree - imo he made the statement on behalf of Hibs only - and it was in response to other clubs concern that we may lose Oldco out of the top division - While I agree with you that Hearts appear to have gained an advantage here, dealing with this is hardly RP job????

[blackpoolhibs]

We may have to disagree - imo he made the statement on behalf of Hibs only - and it was in response to other clubs concern that we may lose Oldco out of the top division - While I agree with you that Hearts appear to have gained an advantage here, dealing with this is hardly RP job????

I disagree, if everyone just says nothing then nothing will ever change, people have to speak out against this, and Petrie has previous, and if not him then Dempster.

We cant have rules applied that are just made up as they go along.