Apologies again for the radio silence.
Thanks to Nessy for pointing out that the Ryman League's appeals board found the "given the specific and unusual circumstances the deduction of 18 points [for AFC Wimbledon] was excessive" and reduced the punishment to three. Obviously I'd like to claim this as The Sweet FA's first victory for common sense, but that would mark me as someone who just as frequently used the phrase "political correctness gone mad". Besides, I suspect the campaigning efforts of you, the readership, were a drop in the ocean in this case. But thanks all the same.
I'm also going to note that the racism charge against Emre was not proven.
Someone in the Guardian's "The Fiver" newsletter compared a fan's attempted assault on Frank Lampard in the Spurs game to, I think, a Stoke City game some time ago. In both cases, team-mates leapt on the encroacher and, um, put their points across forcefully; only Stoke were charged with failing to control their players. Anyone got details? I don't have time to look it up right now, I'm supposed to be working ;o)
Monday, March 26, 2007
Thursday, March 15, 2007
Penalty shoot-outs
Apologies for radio silence. I haven't been outraged by anything much recently.
---
The Football league is reportedly "considering" the introduction of shoot-outs to decide drawn games.
---
Naturally, everyone the article spoke to is dead-set against it. However, I personally don't think the idea is entirely without merit. The argument I can see in its favour is that England are generally awful at penalties - I suspect Scotland and others would also be awful at penalties if we weren't so awful at football that we never get to the stages where they happen. If the pressure of a shoot-out was routine - I think it's something like 30% of games are drawn - players would be better-equipped to cope with them in World Cups and the like.
That said, giving a team a bonus point for winning a shoot-out would devalue a win 'in regulation' (sorry, I live in the US and have seen much more ice hockey than footy this year). In hockey, a shoot-out win is worth 2 points, just like a normal one, and you get a point just for getting to overtime.
I'm a little averse to meddling with the points system again, but it might be interesting to award teams involved in a draw no points, unless they were to win the penalty shoot-out*. The idea would be to make it less attractive to play for a draw.
Ah, listen to me, I'm getting all Blattery and proposing nonsensical rule changes for the sake of it. What do you think?
* Because I'm a geek, I might have a look at how that would affect league standings.
---
The Football league is reportedly "considering" the introduction of shoot-outs to decide drawn games.
---
Naturally, everyone the article spoke to is dead-set against it. However, I personally don't think the idea is entirely without merit. The argument I can see in its favour is that England are generally awful at penalties - I suspect Scotland and others would also be awful at penalties if we weren't so awful at football that we never get to the stages where they happen. If the pressure of a shoot-out was routine - I think it's something like 30% of games are drawn - players would be better-equipped to cope with them in World Cups and the like.
That said, giving a team a bonus point for winning a shoot-out would devalue a win 'in regulation' (sorry, I live in the US and have seen much more ice hockey than footy this year). In hockey, a shoot-out win is worth 2 points, just like a normal one, and you get a point just for getting to overtime.
I'm a little averse to meddling with the points system again, but it might be interesting to award teams involved in a draw no points, unless they were to win the penalty shoot-out*. The idea would be to make it less attractive to play for a draw.
Ah, listen to me, I'm getting all Blattery and proposing nonsensical rule changes for the sake of it. What do you think?
* Because I'm a geek, I might have a look at how that would affect league standings.
Friday, March 2, 2007
Emre Belozoglu
Another upcoming case. Emre is accused of racially abusing several players, including Everton's Joseph Yobo, and Watford's Al Bangura. It seems unlikely that the Bangura incident will result in charges owing to a shortage of evidence. The FA (according to the Guardian) insists that their disciplinary committee is too experienced to be influenced by media coverage of the case. The hearing is scheduled for mid-March.
***
Again, I don't want to prejudge anything here. I will parrot the line that racism has absolutely no place in football and that if Emre is found guilty, should be heavily punished. That said, the charge is a serious one and needs to be considered very carefully - I don't hold a lot of truck with the idea that if you accuse someone of something often enough, he must have been guilty at least once; on the other hand, I don't want to believe that professional footballers would simply make shit like this up. I would find it hard to credit that there were no cameras pointing anywhere near the players involved, but there's no mention of video evidence, only of the FA writing to Yobo's team-mates to get their version of events.
***
Again, I don't want to prejudge anything here. I will parrot the line that racism has absolutely no place in football and that if Emre is found guilty, should be heavily punished. That said, the charge is a serious one and needs to be considered very carefully - I don't hold a lot of truck with the idea that if you accuse someone of something often enough, he must have been guilty at least once; on the other hand, I don't want to believe that professional footballers would simply make shit like this up. I would find it hard to credit that there were no cameras pointing anywhere near the players involved, but there's no mention of video evidence, only of the FA writing to Yobo's team-mates to get their version of events.
The Tevez/Mascherano saga
This isn't the FA, but the Premier League who have charged West Ham United with improper dealings relating to the signing of Tevez and Mascherano last summer. If they're found guilty (of failing to disclose the third-party ownership of the players, and not acting in good faith over the matter) they will be fined and/or docked points. West Ham are fighting the charge.
***
I'm not going to prejudge this one. The one thing that strikes me is that the EPL has moved with the kind of pace we'd normally associate with the FA - it's fully six months since the pair signed for the Hammers and one of them has since moved on.
***
I'm not going to prejudge this one. The one thing that strikes me is that the EPL has moved with the kind of pace we'd normally associate with the FA - it's fully six months since the pair signed for the Hammers and one of them has since moved on.
Thursday, March 1, 2007
John Terry's head
Via Steve Nuttall:
John Terry was carried off during the Carling Cup final after suffering a head injury. Some sources cite FA regulations stating that a concussed player must convalesce for 10 days before being allowed to play again; the FA are currently saying that 'all head injuries are different' and deny that there's any mandatory rest period. They are, however, insisting on full medical clearance before allowing Terry to play again.
***
In this case, even if the rules do say there's a mandatory 10-day rest period, I think the FA are acting sensibly. The rule (if it exists) is presumably there to protect players from being rushed back before being fully recovered from a head injury, and it is rather silly to say that every brain needs ten days to recover. I'm really trying hard to resist the obvious joke that follows from that; I'll leave it for readers to fill in.
At best, this could be used as a precedent for the FA abandoning a nonsensical rule. Let's hope they do that more often.
John Terry was carried off during the Carling Cup final after suffering a head injury. Some sources cite FA regulations stating that a concussed player must convalesce for 10 days before being allowed to play again; the FA are currently saying that 'all head injuries are different' and deny that there's any mandatory rest period. They are, however, insisting on full medical clearance before allowing Terry to play again.
***
In this case, even if the rules do say there's a mandatory 10-day rest period, I think the FA are acting sensibly. The rule (if it exists) is presumably there to protect players from being rushed back before being fully recovered from a head injury, and it is rather silly to say that every brain needs ten days to recover. I'm really trying hard to resist the obvious joke that follows from that; I'll leave it for readers to fill in.
At best, this could be used as a precedent for the FA abandoning a nonsensical rule. Let's hope they do that more often.
Wednesday, February 28, 2007
AFC Wimbledon's point deduction: Update
This is also covered in the original AFCW post, but I thought I should put it at the top as well.
Mitchamboy points to a Parliamentary Early Day Motion (scroll to number 992) that you can encourage your MP to sign. The text is:
| PUNISHMENT BY THE FOOTBALL AUTHORITIES AGAINST AFC WIMBLEDON | 27:2:07 |
| Siobhain McDonagh | |
| Alan Keen | |
| Bob Russell | |
| Mr John Greenway | |
| Mr Clive Betts | |
| Christine Russell |
| * 16 |
| Clive Efford | Mr Fraser Kemp | Mr Stephen Hepburn | |
| Mr Andrew Love | Mrs Joan Humble | Laura Moffatt | |
| Mrs Sharon Hodgson | Mr Graham Allen | Mr Alan Meale | |
| Ian Lucas |
| That this House regrets that AFC Wimbledon of the Ryman League Premier Division has been deducted 18 points, fined and thrown out of the FA Trophy and the Surrey Senior Cup for registering a player without also completing an International Transfer Certificate, even through his previous club, Cardiff City, play in the Championship, which is in the English league structure, and he had retired from that club due to injury; believes that this is an excessive punishment for a minor administrative error, as the club sought no advantage and there was no dishonesty, and few people at a small community club would have realised he needed an international transfer; further notes that the error was only discovered when the player was given his first yellow card, and that if he had been a dirty player the mistake would have been uncovered earlier and the punishment would have been smaller; also notes that AFC Wimbledon was established when local fans set up their own community club after another injustice, the football authorities' decision to allow Wimbledon FC to move its franchise to Milton Keynes in 2002; congratulates AFC Wimbledon for regularly attracting crowds of several thousands and for rising from the bottom of the football pyramid to be just three promotions from entering the Football League; and regrets that if the deduction of 18 points is not reversed they will fall from top to only 13th in the Ryman League Premier Division and their fans will be robbed of the chance of celebrating promotion. |
Tuesday, February 27, 2007
Wembley
As for the national stadium, I'm not even going to say anything. I just wanted to put it out there for others to point fingers.
Barrow vs. Chester
This was pointed out to me by InsiderInformation, but I recall seeing it somewhere other than here, from which I quote:
In 2001 Barrow and Chester were drawn against each other in the 4th qualifying round of the FA Cup. However both were owned by Stephen Vaughan. This was not against the rules, but it did mean that the teams could not play each other.
Vaughan then sold his share holding to Mr Brown - a painter working on the Chester stadium. The FA held a full and detailed enquiry, declared themselves totally satisfied, and allowed the match to go ahead. Two days after the game Mr Brown sold his shares back to Mr Vaughan. The FA took no further action at all.
***
Maybe the suits were out to smooth Chester's progress through the FA Cup? I've no idea how this should have been resolved, but I'd have to label it ridiculous.
In 2001 Barrow and Chester were drawn against each other in the 4th qualifying round of the FA Cup. However both were owned by Stephen Vaughan. This was not against the rules, but it did mean that the teams could not play each other.
Vaughan then sold his share holding to Mr Brown - a painter working on the Chester stadium. The FA held a full and detailed enquiry, declared themselves totally satisfied, and allowed the match to go ahead. Two days after the game Mr Brown sold his shares back to Mr Vaughan. The FA took no further action at all.
***
Maybe the suits were out to smooth Chester's progress through the FA Cup? I've no idea how this should have been resolved, but I'd have to label it ridiculous.
Steve McClaren
Bluedaddio suggested the appointment of Steve McClaren as England manager as a farce worthy of consideration.
McClaren, of course, had had a good run in the UEFA cup with Middlesbrough. In the league... not so much. The FA, as late as April, were reputed to have a shortlist including McClaren, Portugal coach Luiz Felipe Scolari, Sam Allardyce, Alan Curbishley and Martin O'Neill. It was a painful saga, even for those of us watching with amused neutrality.
Here things become a little hazy. It was alleged that Scolari was offered the England job but then turned it down citing media intrusion. However, he later apologised for suggesting that was the case. In the end, the FA opted for McClaren, who at least had the important quality of being English.
***
McClaren has taken up where Sven-Goran Eriksson left off in providing uninspiring, at-most-halfway-competent team selections, formations and performances. It's hardly a first offence for the FA on this front - I'd cite Taylor, Keegan and Hoddle off the top of my head as desperately poor choices for the job. Yet it's a job nobody in their right mind would want to do. Is it the case that England fans have unrealistic expectations of what their team should achieve? How much difference does the coach really make to the team? How would you have done things differently?
McClaren, of course, had had a good run in the UEFA cup with Middlesbrough. In the league... not so much. The FA, as late as April, were reputed to have a shortlist including McClaren, Portugal coach Luiz Felipe Scolari, Sam Allardyce, Alan Curbishley and Martin O'Neill. It was a painful saga, even for those of us watching with amused neutrality.
Here things become a little hazy. It was alleged that Scolari was offered the England job but then turned it down citing media intrusion. However, he later apologised for suggesting that was the case. In the end, the FA opted for McClaren, who at least had the important quality of being English.
***
McClaren has taken up where Sven-Goran Eriksson left off in providing uninspiring, at-most-halfway-competent team selections, formations and performances. It's hardly a first offence for the FA on this front - I'd cite Taylor, Keegan and Hoddle off the top of my head as desperately poor choices for the job. Yet it's a job nobody in their right mind would want to do. Is it the case that England fans have unrealistic expectations of what their team should achieve? How much difference does the coach really make to the team? How would you have done things differently?
Javier Mascherano
I must confess to being a little confused about the controversy surrounding Mascherano's moves this season. Let's take the easy one first, the transfer from West Ham to Liverpool. FIFA rules apparently forbid a player from playing competitive games for more than two clubs in a season (where a season runs from July to June). The first club, Brazilian side Corinthians - being from South America - have a different season, so FIFA decided it wasn't a problem.
Now, the first one is more confusing. It seems* that Mascherano (and his compatriot Carlos Tevez) had registrations held not by West Ham but by Media Sports Investment, who were involved in a take-over bid for the Hammers at the time. Indeed, this third-party involvement was one of the reasons behind the delay in the Premier League allowing the second transfer to go through.
I can see there's something dubious about a player's registration not being held by a club, but I'd be grateful if anyone could put my uneasy feeling into words and maybe explain what's going on there.
* i.e., Wikipedia says.
Now, the first one is more confusing. It seems* that Mascherano (and his compatriot Carlos Tevez) had registrations held not by West Ham but by Media Sports Investment, who were involved in a take-over bid for the Hammers at the time. Indeed, this third-party involvement was one of the reasons behind the delay in the Premier League allowing the second transfer to go through.
I can see there's something dubious about a player's registration not being held by a club, but I'd be grateful if anyone could put my uneasy feeling into words and maybe explain what's going on there.
* i.e., Wikipedia says.
Altrincham's points deduction
In discussion of AFC Wimbledon's points deduction, much has been made of Altrincham's almost-identical punishment last season.
James Robinson came to Altrincham from Accrington Stanley. Before that, he'd played in Iceland. He didn't feature in any Accrington games, but - as I understand - it was they who should have obtained international clearance but didn't. Once the error came to light, Altrincham were docked 18 points, which would have been enough to demote them had other clubs (Canvey Island and Scarborough) not been forcibly or voluntarily relegated in their place.
***
For me, if AFC's punishment was unjust, Altrincham's borders on the ridiculous. Being docked 18 points for your own oversight is bad enough, but for someone else's error? Come on now. Luckily, Altrincham escaped relegation, but the case is being used as a precedent for the AFC process (in a different league).
James Robinson came to Altrincham from Accrington Stanley. Before that, he'd played in Iceland. He didn't feature in any Accrington games, but - as I understand - it was they who should have obtained international clearance but didn't. Once the error came to light, Altrincham were docked 18 points, which would have been enough to demote them had other clubs (Canvey Island and Scarborough) not been forcibly or voluntarily relegated in their place.
***
For me, if AFC's punishment was unjust, Altrincham's borders on the ridiculous. Being docked 18 points for your own oversight is bad enough, but for someone else's error? Come on now. Luckily, Altrincham escaped relegation, but the case is being used as a precedent for the AFC process (in a different league).
Bury's FA Cup elimination
Bury eliminated from FA Cup
Bury were eliminated from the FA Cup after fielding an ineligible player in the second round. Stephen Turnbull was on loan from Hartlepool when he appeared against Chester in a replay. As I understand it, he was ineligible because Hartlepool competed in the second round; Bury assumed that since Hartlepool lost their game, Turnbull was available for the replay, and confirmed this verbally with Hartlepool - however, the paperwork wasn't completed in time. As soon as Bury realised their mistake, they contacted the FA to admit it; for coming clean, they were eliminated from the cup and replaced by Chester.
***
Again, I feel this is a trifle on the harsh side. I think a fair outcome would be to replay the match. Any thoughts?
Bury were eliminated from the FA Cup after fielding an ineligible player in the second round. Stephen Turnbull was on loan from Hartlepool when he appeared against Chester in a replay. As I understand it, he was ineligible because Hartlepool competed in the second round; Bury assumed that since Hartlepool lost their game, Turnbull was available for the replay, and confirmed this verbally with Hartlepool - however, the paperwork wasn't completed in time. As soon as Bury realised their mistake, they contacted the FA to admit it; for coming clean, they were eliminated from the cup and replaced by Chester.
***
Again, I feel this is a trifle on the harsh side. I think a fair outcome would be to replay the match. Any thoughts?
AFC Wimbledon's point deduction
Let's start here.
AFC Wimbledon signed Jermaine Darlington from a non-league outfit earlier this season. Unknown to AFC, his previous registration had been with Cardiff City under the Welsh FA, requiring them to tick a box on the registration form - which they failed to do, making Darlington ineligible for somewhere in the region of a dozen games. The mistake only came to light after Darlington was booked.
As a result, AFC were thrown out of the FA Trophy, the Surrey Senior Cup and docked 18 points in the Ryman League - those gained in games where Darlington played.
---
My view on this is that the punishment for a minor clerical error is hugely disproportionate. Yes, AFC inadvertently broke the rules - in letter, for sure, but hardly in spirit. They certainly gained no advantage from it. My feeling is that three points and the cup eliminations would be about right. Anyone else have an opinion?
***
EDIT: Mitchamboy points to a Parliamentary Early Day Motion (scroll to number 992) that you can encourage your MP to sign. The text is:
AFC Wimbledon signed Jermaine Darlington from a non-league outfit earlier this season. Unknown to AFC, his previous registration had been with Cardiff City under the Welsh FA, requiring them to tick a box on the registration form - which they failed to do, making Darlington ineligible for somewhere in the region of a dozen games. The mistake only came to light after Darlington was booked.
As a result, AFC were thrown out of the FA Trophy, the Surrey Senior Cup and docked 18 points in the Ryman League - those gained in games where Darlington played.
---
My view on this is that the punishment for a minor clerical error is hugely disproportionate. Yes, AFC inadvertently broke the rules - in letter, for sure, but hardly in spirit. They certainly gained no advantage from it. My feeling is that three points and the cup eliminations would be about right. Anyone else have an opinion?
***
EDIT: Mitchamboy points to a Parliamentary Early Day Motion (scroll to number 992) that you can encourage your MP to sign. The text is:
| PUNISHMENT BY THE FOOTBALL AUTHORITIES AGAINST AFC WIMBLEDON | 27:2:07 |
| Siobhain McDonagh | |
| Alan Keen | |
| Bob Russell | |
| Mr John Greenway | |
| Mr Clive Betts | |
| Christine Russell |
| * 16 |
| Clive Efford | Mr Fraser Kemp | Mr Stephen Hepburn | |
| Mr Andrew Love | Mrs Joan Humble | Laura Moffatt | |
| Mrs Sharon Hodgson | Mr Graham Allen | Mr Alan Meale | |
| Ian Lucas |
| That this House regrets that AFC Wimbledon of the Ryman League Premier Division has been deducted 18 points, fined and thrown out of the FA Trophy and the Surrey Senior Cup for registering a player without also completing an International Transfer Certificate, even through his previous club, Cardiff City, play in the Championship, which is in the English league structure, and he had retired from that club due to injury; believes that this is an excessive punishment for a minor administrative error, as the club sought no advantage and there was no dishonesty, and few people at a small community club would have realised he needed an international transfer; further notes that the error was only discovered when the player was given his first yellow card, and that if he had been a dirty player the mistake would have been uncovered earlier and the punishment would have been smaller; also notes that AFC Wimbledon was established when local fans set up their own community club after another injustice, the football authorities' decision to allow Wimbledon FC to move its franchise to Milton Keynes in 2002; congratulates AFC Wimbledon for regularly attracting crowds of several thousands and for rising from the bottom of the football pyramid to be just three promotions from entering the Football League; and regrets that if the deduction of 18 points is not reversed they will fall from top to only 13th in the Ryman League Premier Division and their fans will be robbed of the chance of celebrating promotion. |
Welcome!
Welcome to The Sweet FA, a blog devoted to the antics of some sleepy old men in Soho Square. Has your team been on the wrong end of an unjust punishment? Have you spotted a ridiculous anomaly in the decision-making process? Have you got a fan-driven campaign going on? Let us know.
This forum was inspired by comments in the Guardian sports blog by InsiderInformation and Duncan23 suggesting that a page like this be set up. So thank them, if you like.
This forum was inspired by comments in the Guardian sports blog by InsiderInformation and Duncan23 suggesting that a page like this be set up. So thank them, if you like.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)