|
View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
nemo
Coach
Joined: 19 Dec 2006
Last Visit: 17 Jun 2017
Posts: 2096
Topics: 81
|
 Posted: Wed May 10, 2017 10:42 am Post subject:
|
 |
|
| 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...  |
Good point! |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Ian
Director of Football
Joined: 17 Dec 2006
Last Visit: 30 May 2017
Posts: 15160
Topics: 214
Location: The Parish of Rusper
|
| Posted: Wed May 10, 2017 12:13 pm Post subject:
|
|
|
| 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 |
|
|
nemo
Coach
Joined: 19 Dec 2006
Last Visit: 17 Jun 2017
Posts: 2096
Topics: 81
|
| Posted: Wed May 10, 2017 4:30 pm Post subject:
|
|
|
| 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 |
|
|
Simon
Manager
Joined: 16 Dec 2006
Last Visit: 09 Jul 2017
Posts: 12671
Topics: 380
|
| Posted: Wed May 10, 2017 9:01 pm Post subject:
|
|
|
| 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 |
|
|
Red, Red & Red
Manager
Joined: 17 Dec 2006
Last Visit: 15 Jul 2018
Posts: 11231
Topics: 379
|
| Posted: Wed May 10, 2017 10:50 pm Post subject:
|
|
|
| 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 |
|
|
Ian
Director of Football
Joined: 17 Dec 2006
Last Visit: 30 May 2017
Posts: 15160
Topics: 214
Location: The Parish of Rusper
|
| Posted: Thu May 11, 2017 12:16 pm Post subject:
|
|
|
| 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  !) 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 |
|
|
Crawley Ben
Coach
Joined: 15 Dec 2010
Last Visit: 04 Jun 2017
Posts: 2123
Topics: 176
Location: Broadfield
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nemo
Coach
Joined: 19 Dec 2006
Last Visit: 17 Jun 2017
Posts: 2096
Topics: 81
|
| Posted: Thu May 18, 2017 6:13 pm Post subject:
|
|
|
| FA find against Haywards Heath. Points deduction to be finalised at meeting with the SCFL |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lochislair
Assistant Manager
Joined: 29 Dec 2006
Last Visit: 18 Sep 2017
Posts: 4263
Topics: 129
Location: Dunny on the Wold, Hassocks
|
| Posted: Thu May 18, 2017 8:19 pm Post subject:
|
|
|
| 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 |
|
|
nemo
Coach
Joined: 19 Dec 2006
Last Visit: 17 Jun 2017
Posts: 2096
Topics: 81
|
| Posted: Thu May 18, 2017 10:41 pm Post subject:
|
|
|
| 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. |
 
Its an absolute joke |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Red, Red & Red
Manager
Joined: 17 Dec 2006
Last Visit: 15 Jul 2018
Posts: 11231
Topics: 379
|
| Posted: Fri May 19, 2017 8:21 am Post subject:
|
|
|
| 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. |
Its an absolute joke |
the FA are never wrong except for when they dont get it right |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ian
Director of Football
Joined: 17 Dec 2006
Last Visit: 30 May 2017
Posts: 15160
Topics: 214
Location: The Parish of Rusper
|
| Posted: Fri May 19, 2017 12:14 pm Post subject:
|
|
|
| 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. |
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 |
|
|
nemo
Coach
Joined: 19 Dec 2006
Last Visit: 17 Jun 2017
Posts: 2096
Topics: 81
|
| Posted: Fri May 19, 2017 1:40 pm Post subject:
|
|
|
| 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. |
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 |
|
|
Simon
Manager
Joined: 16 Dec 2006
Last Visit: 09 Jul 2017
Posts: 12671
Topics: 380
|
| Posted: Fri May 19, 2017 7:50 pm Post subject:
|
|
|
| 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. |
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 |
|
|
Red, Red & Red
Manager
Joined: 17 Dec 2006
Last Visit: 15 Jul 2018
Posts: 11231
Topics: 379
|
| Posted: Mon May 22, 2017 10:16 pm Post subject:
|
|
|
[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 previous topic :: View next topic |
|
Calendar
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Profile
Log in
