CTFC.net Fans Forum -> Forum Index
CTFC.net on Facebook CTFC.net on Twitter CTFC.net photos
 CalendarCalendar   FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   
ProfileProfile   Log inLog in   

Crawley links: CTFC.net | Official site | Reds Player | CTFC YouTube | Club shop | Ticket sales | Supporters Alliance | GH Coaches | Broadfield Stadium | CTFC.net's Gallery | CTFC History | General links: Crawley Observer | Crawley News | The Argus | Ross Mitchell Photography | Football League 2 | BBCi League 2 pages | BBC Sussex | BBC Radio Sussex | BBC Radio Surrey | The Football League Paper | Football Web Pages | Football Ground Guide | Oddschecker |


A little more Non League...
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic   printer-friendly view    CTFC.net Fans Forum -> Forum Index -> Talk football
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
nemo
Coach
Coach


Joined: 19 Dec 2006
Last Visit: 17 Jun 2017
Posts: 2096
Topics: 81

PostPosted: Wed May 10, 2017 10:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

matcowdrey wrote:
nemo wrote:
Simon wrote:
Looks like it could all go Pete Tong for HH.

Charged by the FA with misconduct due to using a player suspended sine die.

Could be a complicated one as it seems the player actually appeared for 5 clubs whilst banned and none of the FA websites were updated to show the suspension....

From what I've heard the various FAs - Surrey, Sussex and Kent I believe should be hanging their heads in shame. Any criticism/sanction of HH or Melford Simpson would simply be just a massive whitewash to try and save FA officials faces


Well at least there's no precedent there then... Rolling Eyes

Good point!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ian
Director of Football
Director of Football


Joined: 17 Dec 2006
Last Visit: 30 May 2017
Posts: 15160
Topics: 214
Location: The Parish of Rusper

PostPosted: Wed May 10, 2017 12:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

nemo wrote:
Simon wrote:
Looks like it could all go Pete Tong for HH.

Charged by the FA with misconduct due to using a player suspended sine die.

Could be a complicated one as it seems the player actually appeared for 5 clubs whilst banned and none of the FA websites were updated to show the suspension....

From what I've heard the various FAs - Surrey, Sussex and Kent I believe should be hanging their heads in shame. Any criticism/sanction of HH or Melford Simpson would simply be just a massive whitewash to try and save FA officials faces


If Melford Simpson is the player involved then he shouldn't be immune from criticism - he surely knew he was banned sine die?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
nemo
Coach
Coach


Joined: 19 Dec 2006
Last Visit: 17 Jun 2017
Posts: 2096
Topics: 81

PostPosted: Wed May 10, 2017 4:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ian wrote:
nemo wrote:
Simon wrote:
Looks like it could all go Pete Tong for HH.

Charged by the FA with misconduct due to using a player suspended sine die.

Could be a complicated one as it seems the player actually appeared for 5 clubs whilst banned and none of the FA websites were updated to show the suspension....

From what I've heard the various FAs - Surrey, Sussex and Kent I believe should be hanging their heads in shame. Any criticism/sanction of HH or Melford Simpson would simply be just a massive whitewash to try and save FA officials faces


If Melford Simpson is the player involved then he shouldn't be immune from criticism - he surely knew he was banned sine die?

It helps to have some paperwork...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Simon
Manager
Manager


Joined: 16 Dec 2006
Last Visit: 09 Jul 2017
Posts: 12671
Topics: 380

PostPosted: Wed May 10, 2017 9:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ian wrote:
nemo wrote:
Simon wrote:
Looks like it could all go Pete Tong for HH.

Charged by the FA with misconduct due to using a player suspended sine die.

Could be a complicated one as it seems the player actually appeared for 5 clubs whilst banned and none of the FA websites were updated to show the suspension....

From what I've heard the various FAs - Surrey, Sussex and Kent I believe should be hanging their heads in shame. Any criticism/sanction of HH or Melford Simpson would simply be just a massive whitewash to try and save FA officials faces


If Melford Simpson is the player involved then he shouldn't be immune from criticism - he surely knew he was banned sine die?


That is exactly what the player is saying. He wasn't aware as the suspension related to unpaid disciplinary fees by the club not relating to him personally.

Surely a bit odd that the player has played for 4/5 clubs since then (ironically including Shoreham I gather) and not one club was aware. And the suspension did not appear on any of the lusts of the County FAs involved.

Perhaps the blazers expect every club secretary to be a mind reader....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Red, Red & Red
Manager
Manager


Joined: 17 Dec 2006
Last Visit: 12 Sep 2017
Posts: 11231
Topics: 379

PostPosted: Wed May 10, 2017 10:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Simon wrote:
Ian wrote:
nemo wrote:
Simon wrote:
Looks like it could all go Pete Tong for HH.

Charged by the FA with misconduct due to using a player suspended sine die.

Could be a complicated one as it seems the player actually appeared for 5 clubs whilst banned and none of the FA websites were updated to show the suspension....

From what I've heard the various FAs - Surrey, Sussex and Kent I believe should be hanging their heads in shame. Any criticism/sanction of HH or Melford Simpson would simply be just a massive whitewash to try and save FA officials faces


If Melford Simpson is the player involved then he shouldn't be immune from criticism - he surely knew he was banned sine die?


That is exactly what the player is saying. He wasn't aware as the suspension related to unpaid disciplinary fees by the club not relating to him personally.

Surely a bit odd that the player has played for 4/5 clubs since then (ironically including Shoreham I gather) and not one club was aware. And the suspension did not appear on any of the lusts of the County FAs involved.

Perhaps the blazers expect every club secretary to be a mind reader....
not sure I want to think about what the County FQ's are lusting about!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ian
Director of Football
Director of Football


Joined: 17 Dec 2006
Last Visit: 30 May 2017
Posts: 15160
Topics: 214
Location: The Parish of Rusper

PostPosted: Thu May 11, 2017 12:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Simon wrote:
Ian wrote:
nemo wrote:
Simon wrote:
Looks like it could all go Pete Tong for HH.

Charged by the FA with misconduct due to using a player suspended sine die.

Could be a complicated one as it seems the player actually appeared for 5 clubs whilst banned and none of the FA websites were updated to show the suspension....

From what I've heard the various FAs - Surrey, Sussex and Kent I believe should be hanging their heads in shame. Any criticism/sanction of HH or Melford Simpson would simply be just a massive whitewash to try and save FA officials faces


If Melford Simpson is the player involved then he shouldn't be immune from criticism - he surely knew he was banned sine die?


That is exactly what the player is saying. He wasn't aware as the suspension related to unpaid disciplinary fees by the club not relating to him personally.

Surely a bit odd that the player has played for 4/5 clubs since then (ironically including Shoreham I gather) and not one club was aware. And the suspension did not appear on any of the lusts of the County FAs involved.

Perhaps the blazers expect every club secretary to be a mind reader....


I wasn't aware of the exact situation (Google gave me nothing, which is probably part of the problem Very Happy !) and assumed it was for assaulting an official as thats what sine die is normally imposed for.

So it's just until fines are paid, but no one was ever told that they weren't paid? What a shambles. They should probably brush this under the carpet...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Crawley Ben
Coach
Coach


Joined: 15 Dec 2010
Last Visit: 04 Jun 2017
Posts: 2123
Topics: 176
Location: Broadfield

PostPosted: Thu May 18, 2017 3:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Adam Hinshelwood has left Brighton and is taking over as Hastings manager.

http://www.theargus.co.uk/spor.....ings_boss/

Ben
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
nemo
Coach
Coach


Joined: 19 Dec 2006
Last Visit: 17 Jun 2017
Posts: 2096
Topics: 81

PostPosted: Thu May 18, 2017 6:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

FA find against Haywards Heath. Points deduction to be finalised at meeting with the SCFL
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
lochislair
Assistant Manager
Assistant Manager


Joined: 29 Dec 2006
Last Visit: 18 Sep 2017
Posts: 4263
Topics: 129
Location: Dunny on the Wold, Hassocks

PostPosted: Thu May 18, 2017 8:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

nemo wrote:
FA find against Haywards Heath. Points deduction to be finalised at meeting with the SCFL


Seems very much as if the FA expect clubs to employ clairvoyants as well as administrators.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
nemo
Coach
Coach


Joined: 19 Dec 2006
Last Visit: 17 Jun 2017
Posts: 2096
Topics: 81

PostPosted: Thu May 18, 2017 10:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

lochislair wrote:
nemo wrote:
FA find against Haywards Heath. Points deduction to be finalised at meeting with the SCFL


Seems very much as if the FA expect clubs to employ clairvoyants as well as administrators.

thumbleft Laughing
Its an absolute joke
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Red, Red & Red
Manager
Manager


Joined: 17 Dec 2006
Last Visit: 12 Sep 2017
Posts: 11231
Topics: 379

PostPosted: Fri May 19, 2017 8:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

nemo wrote:
lochislair wrote:
nemo wrote:
FA find against Haywards Heath. Points deduction to be finalised at meeting with the SCFL


Seems very much as if the FA expect clubs to employ clairvoyants as well as administrators.

thumbleft Laughing
Its an absolute joke
the FA are never wrong except for when they dont get it right
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ian
Director of Football
Director of Football


Joined: 17 Dec 2006
Last Visit: 30 May 2017
Posts: 15160
Topics: 214
Location: The Parish of Rusper

PostPosted: Fri May 19, 2017 12:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

nemo wrote:
lochislair wrote:
nemo wrote:
FA find against Haywards Heath. Points deduction to be finalised at meeting with the SCFL


Seems very much as if the FA expect clubs to employ clairvoyants as well as administrators.

thumbleft Laughing
Its an absolute joke


I wonder if they will find them guilty, and impose a 0 point deduction because of the circumstances.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
nemo
Coach
Coach


Joined: 19 Dec 2006
Last Visit: 17 Jun 2017
Posts: 2096
Topics: 81

PostPosted: Fri May 19, 2017 1:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ian wrote:
nemo wrote:
lochislair wrote:
nemo wrote:
FA find against Haywards Heath. Points deduction to be finalised at meeting with the SCFL


Seems very much as if the FA expect clubs to employ clairvoyants as well as administrators.

thumbleft Laughing
Its an absolute joke


I wonder if they will find them guilty, and impose a 0 point deduction because of the circumstances.

Hope so - it would be the sensible thing to do but hey this is the SCFL 🙁
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Simon
Manager
Manager


Joined: 16 Dec 2006
Last Visit: 09 Jul 2017
Posts: 12671
Topics: 380

PostPosted: Fri May 19, 2017 7:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ian wrote:
nemo wrote:
lochislair wrote:
nemo wrote:
FA find against Haywards Heath. Points deduction to be finalised at meeting with the SCFL


Seems very much as if the FA expect clubs to employ clairvoyants as well as administrators.

thumbleft Laughing
Its an absolute joke


I wonder if they will find them guilty, and impose a 0 point deduction because of the circumstances.


3 points would be OK and a healthy dose of 'brush it under the carpet'.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Red, Red & Red
Manager
Manager


Joined: 17 Dec 2006
Last Visit: 12 Sep 2017
Posts: 11231
Topics: 379

PostPosted: Mon May 22, 2017 10:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

[url]
http://www.pitchero.com/clubs/.....07142.html
[/url]
On Heath website
Quote:


SCFL have tonight issued Heath with a 9 point deduction leaving the title and promotion in the balance
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic   printer-friendly view    CTFC.net Fans Forum -> Forum Index -> Talk football All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next
Page 9 of 10

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot post calendar events in this forum






This forum is run independently from and has no connection with the Crawley Town Football Club official site
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group :: Spelling by SpellingCow.


  Username:    Password:      Log me on automatically each visit