Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

Parkinson out...

...of the FA cup.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/20639664

Seems a bit harsh to me - as the match was a draw and the replay was scheduled to be 'away' for Bradford, could they not just have gone ahead with it anyway?

Comments

  • Sounds disproportionate to me.
  • How so Jodaius? Had Good not been in the team then Brentford may have won?
  • Ross said:

    How so Jodaius? Had Good not been in the team then Brentford may have won?

    I suppose, but we will never know. I would have thought the opportunity for Brentford to replay at home with the 'correct' players might have been enough, perhaps along with a fine for breaching the administrative rules.

    Having said that, fielding an ineligible player has always seemed a bit stupid to me - they must have known that the paperwork hadn't gone through, so why bother? It's difficult to have a huge amount of sympathy.
  • Everyone should know that only West Ham are allowed to get away with fielding ineligable players.
    I disagree with Jodaius that they 'must have known'. The paperwork is filed by the club secretary (usually based at the training ground) and faxed over to the FA. Maybe the fax machine didn't work, maybe the cluib secretary was off that day and a junior member of staff took over and did it wrong.
    Parky could easily have agreed his end and set off for the stadium beleiving everything to be in order and ot heard back that for what ever reason the forms had not gone through.
  • edited December 2012
    Might stick a tenner on Brentford reaching the quarters now.
    Can hear the montage now: 'They got through to the third round after Bradford were kicked out, and now they're 90minutes away from Wembley' etc....

  • This is a bit off topic, but does anyone remember Semedo's booking at Pboro when we won 5-1.

    Am i right in thinking he intentionally got that so that he would be suspended for an FA cup game, and have the rest of his cards wiped?
    I remember him taking ages to take a free kick when we were winning 5-1, he got booked for time wasting, and then a couple of minutes later he was subbed.

    Don't think the FA ever picked up on this did they?
  • I think there was rumours to that effect, but its not something the club or the player ever offically confirmed (for obvious reasons).
  • Rules are indeed rules - but not when you are Tevez or West Ham apparantly. The problem the FA will now always have is that they chose not to enforce their own rules by not deducting points from West Ham over Tevez, and also the rules stated that West Ham should also have been excluded from the following seasons FA Cup due to Tevez, but they werent. AFC Wimbledon had 17 points, amended th 3 points on appeal deducted from them ironically the same season as the Tevez/West Ham issue for exactly the same player registration issue as Tevez at West Ham. If I were a Sheff United fan
  • dont know what happened there - cut off in mid flow .. cont: if I were a Sheff U fan Ithink my head would have blown off over the injustice of getting relegated from the Prem instead of West Ham. All Clubs are equal, but some are more equal than others it would appear.
  • Out of order. It's only the small clubs that have to put up with this, although Bradford are mahooosive.
  • Sponsored links:


  • edited December 2012
    This is not the first time that a club has been ejected for playing inelligible players. Sorry to sound like a jobsworth .. BUT .. rules is rules as has already been said
  • This is not the first time that a club has been ejected for playing inelligible players. Sorry to sound like a jobsworth .. BUT .. rules is rules as has already been said

    unless you're West Ham which is the point people are making.
  • LenGlover said:

    This is not the first time that a club has been ejected for playing inelligible players. Sorry to sound like a jobsworth .. BUT .. rules is rules as has already been said

    unless you're West Ham which is the point people are making.
    Weren't West Ham kicked out of the League Cup once for fielding an illegible player (who'd played in an earlier round while out on loan...)
  • LenGlover said:

    This is not the first time that a club has been ejected for playing inelligible players. Sorry to sound like a jobsworth .. BUT .. rules is rules as has already been said

    unless you're West Ham which is the point people are making.
    Weren't West Ham kicked out of the League Cup once for fielding an illegible player (who'd played in an earlier round while out on loan...)
    No.

    The game was replayed and West Ham lost.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emmanuel_Omoyinmi

    Not the same thing.
  • LenGlover said:

    LenGlover said:

    This is not the first time that a club has been ejected for playing inelligible players. Sorry to sound like a jobsworth .. BUT .. rules is rules as has already been said

    unless you're West Ham which is the point people are making.
    Weren't West Ham kicked out of the League Cup once for fielding an illegible player (who'd played in an earlier round while out on loan...)
    No.

    The game was replayed and West Ham lost.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emmanuel_Omoyinmi

    Not the same thing.
    Spot on Len, which is why WHU have been extra careful since to make sure there is never ever, ever, EVER, any question over the illegibility and ownership of any of the their players. Crikey they wouldn't want to gain any sort of advantage over others by fielding a player they shouldn't would they?

    :-)

  • LenGlover said:

    This is not the first time that a club has been ejected for playing inelligible players. Sorry to sound like a jobsworth .. BUT .. rules is rules as has already been said

    unless you're West Ham which is the point people are making.
    The 2 situations are different, the Bradford player was not registered, Tevez at W/Ham was registered, the question was whether his 'contract of ownership' breached FA rules .. anyway, at the time of the investigation W/Ham were already out of the cup. Presumably West Ham had good lawyers and put up a good case for not being excluded from future FA cups. I suspect if CAFC had 'got away with one' we would all be applauding
  • edited December 2012

    LenGlover said:

    This is not the first time that a club has been ejected for playing inelligible players. Sorry to sound like a jobsworth .. BUT .. rules is rules as has already been said

    unless you're West Ham which is the point people are making.
    The 2 situations are different, the Bradford player was not registered, Tevez at W/Ham was registered, the question was whether his 'contract of ownership' breached FA rules .. anyway, at the time of the investigation W/Ham were already out of the cup. Presumably West Ham had good lawyers and put up a good case for not being excluded from future FA cups. I suspect if CAFC had 'got away with one' we would all be applauding
    I'm not talking about Tevez (yet another example of inconsistencies where West ham are concerned though) but Omoyinmi who was an illegible player in a cup competition just like the Bradford bloke.

    West Ham were allowed to replay the game, which they lost, Bradford got summarily kicked out of the competition!
  • ^^^^^ agreed, but that was YEARS ago under LEAGUE CUP not FA CUP rules/laws/jurisdiction .. 'laws and times' change, different competitions have different ways of ordering things
  • We were booted out of the Youth Cup in 95 for playing a keeper who had not been registered.
  • Bradford probably won't be that fussed..one less game.
  • Sponsored links:


  • Rules are rules
  • "Bad news for Arsenal - Bradford City have just been reinstated to this year's FA Cup"

    Stolen from Paul Green, the stand up comedian's twitter.
  • Have to replay against Brentford though.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out Forever!