ContinueWe use cookies to ensure that you get the best experience on our website; if you continue without changing your settings - or dismiss this message - we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies on forum.hendonfc.net

Return to front page

Newest article: Dorchester away by AlanAinsworth28/11 16:29Sat Nov 28 16:29:04 2020view thread

Oldest article: Easy Fundraising - Thank You (and a challenge) by John14/8/2013 15:23Wed Aug 14 15:23:51 2013view thread

MenuSearch

Next thread: Ryman League - total confusion? by John Fordham29/4/2015 20:35Wed Apr 29 20:35:31 2015view thread

It`s Met Police ..........

By mello25/4/2015 17:07Sat Apr 25 17:07:41 2015

Views: 4466

in the semi-finals of the play-offs for us if Enfield get deducted the 3 points, if not then it`s Enfield Town. Hope things get sorted by Thursday!!!!!

reply to this article | return to the front page

Play awf's

By Dorset Don25/4/2015 19:18Sat Apr 25 19:18:34 2015In response to It`s Met Police ..........Top of thread

Views: 4511

Ryman league statement tonight says that Enfield hearing due on Thursday 30th unless the club agrees to an earlier date. You really couldn't make this nonsense up!

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Play awf's

By John Rogers25/4/2015 19:55Sat Apr 25 19:55:16 2015In response to Play awf'sTop of thread

Views: 4217

Fair to say, I'm absolutely fuming at the moment.

What was already a needless situation has developed into downright farce.

That we, Margate, Dulwich, Enfield Town and Met Police have to sit in limbo because the governors of our game cannot properly run themselves is an absolute disgrace. Will they care? Will they bollards!

This is simply not good enough. For the clubs, for the fans. For ANYONE.

Personally speaking, if I were an Enfield Town fan right now, I would be spitting feathers. Feathers, fur and various other animal skin coverings. To potentially be punished for downright honesty, and then have others inconvenienced by the ineptitude of those running the game. Incredible.

I hope that on Thursday evening we can enjoy a game of football between the 2nd and 5th best sides in the league this season. Somehow, I suspect I'm going to be hugely disappointed.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Play awf's

By John Rogers25/4/2015 20:16Sat Apr 25 20:16:16 2015In response to Re: Play awf'sTop of thread

Views: 4431

Apologies for that rant. Was feeling quite cross.

It's not so much the situation that I find so frustrating - although that does seem absurd enough from what we have in the public domain, but the timing! If all of this was pointed out to the FA in January, then why the crying Moses did it take them until 48 hours before the close of the season to suddenly find Enfield Town guilty of any 'offence'?

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Play awf's

By Paul Butler (buts1690)26/4/2015 00:05Sun Apr 26 00:05:47 2015In response to Re: Play awf'sTop of thread

Views: 4317

The most logical situation is to let Dulwich go to Margate as normal on Thursday. Enfield broke the rules, Met Police didn't do enough to get 5th spot, so reward neither, and give us a bye straight to the playoff final.

Wishful thinking eh? Haha

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Play awf's

By Pink Panther26/4/2015 10:42Sun Apr 26 10:42:54 2015In response to Re: Play awf'sTop of thread

Views: 4532

Logic went out the window when play-offs were introduced in the first place, otherwise the second best team would get the second promotion place as used to be the case.

If Enfield's points deduction happens the final table will show Not Police did do enough to get 5th place.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Latest for Enfield

By nickhfc26/4/2015 12:35Sun Apr 26 12:35:31 2015In response to Re: Play awf'sTop of thread

Views: 4279

http://www.enfieldtownfootballclub.co.uk/news/enfield-town-message-to-ryman-league-premier-division-clubs-1419889.html

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: Latest for Enfield

By Deadman26/4/2015 12:42Sun Apr 26 12:42:47 2015In response to Latest for Enfield Top of thread

Views: 4163

Nice of Enfield to offer to play the game v Hendon again. Will they give us the gate money too?!!

reply to this article | return to the front page

A balanced view

By John Fordham (Agingdon)26/4/2015 18:48Sun Apr 26 18:48:55 2015In response to Re: Latest for Enfield Top of thread

Views: 4073

http://twohundredpercent.net/?p=27072

If the game gets postponed then I wonder what supporters from outlying areas such as Telford, who have booked train tickets and overnight accommodation would think.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: A balanced view

By rwakeley26/4/2015 20:51Sun Apr 26 20:51:53 2015In response to A balanced viewTop of thread

Views: 4074

I agree with John Rogers synopsis - I am not unduly concerned and fully expect a resolution within the next 24 hours or so.
Given the fact the other semi has been given the green light it is imperative that both games are played at the same time in order to establish an equal recovery period.
Credit to the Enfield fans for showing great restraint throughout their ordeal.
Saturday only further re-iterated my view that the lad's are primed for action at the drop of a hat, and from our perspective, this chaotic chain of events makes little difference.
Irrespective of our opponents and any further developments -
We're ready!

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: A balanced view

By Dorset Don26/4/2015 19:34Sun Apr 26 19:34:58 2015In response to A balanced viewTop of thread

Views: 4306

This is non league "tin-pottery" at its finest. Was planning on making the journey up from Dorset again for the Thursday night game but this will necessitate booking the afternoon off work which requires some notice and planning. Absolutely shamboliC situation. And the irony that the suspended player took part in a game against us which cost us three points is not lost on me. Very unhappy about the whole scenario. And don't even get me started on Enfields 'benevolent' offer to replay the game. To coin a phrase......what are they smoking over there in North Middlesex?

Edited by Dorset Don at 19:39:13 on 26th April 2015

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: A balanced view

By dw26/4/2015 22:58Sun Apr 26 22:58:58 2015In response to Re: A balanced viewTop of thread

Views: 4312

Hopefully, swift action on Monday morning will resolve this fiasco. Without knowing the full story, it does appear to me that if Enfield Town can produce written evidence from the FA that the issue was fully resolved earlier in the year, then they should be cleared to play on Thursday. The mere suggestion of replaying the original league game is simply comical. Thursday is the play-off day - players, officials, supporters cannot be messed around. Either it is Hendon versus Enfield Town or Hendon versus Met Police.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: A balanced view

By Paul Butler (buts1690)27/4/2015 11:28Mon Apr 27 11:28:17 2015In response to Re: A balanced viewTop of thread

Views: 3977

A mate of mine from Enfield reckons there's no way the playoff game will be played on Thursday...

reply to this article | return to the front page

What if ...

By David B27/4/2015 12:53Mon Apr 27 12:53:41 2015In response to Re: A balanced viewTop of thread

Views: 3977

… Sam Higgins had not missed a first-half penalty for East Thurrock United at Maidstone United on Saturday? If East Thurrock had managed a draw against Maidstone, then we would now be one point behind the Stones (well ahead of the Rocks – what happened to Sticks). Our defeat at Enfield Town on 10 January was one of the two matches Aryan Tajbaksh played in when he should have been suspended.

Would the Ryman League have ordered the match to be replayed – which is in the League rules – because the outcome might have decided the League title and the last playoff place? There is certainly a compelling argument for it. With three points and a 16-goal difference separating us and Maidstone, it is entirely reasonable to assume that a replayed game would not turn that gap around in a replayed match (if the match was to be replayed, the 1–0 scoreline would be expunged – sadly my broken phone and the miserable match that day can’t be expunged from the memory so easily).

It is a crazy situation that should not have happened.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: What if ...

By Griff27/4/2015 14:10Mon Apr 27 14:10:12 2015In response to What if ...Top of thread

Views: 3888

One scenario that Enfield Town left out of the equation in their latest statement - play the play-offs as is then use the Swindon Town solution to sort it out. If Enfield win the playoffs and promotion then they subsequently lose their appeal then they are re-relegated back to the Ryman with the losing finalists promoted in their place?

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: What if ...

By Jeff Hill (Malc)27/4/2015 14:25Mon Apr 27 14:25:22 2015In response to Re: What if ...Top of thread

Views: 3875

"One scenario that Enfield Town left out of the equation in their latest statement - play the play-offs as is then use the Swindon Town solution to sort it out. If Enfield win the playoffs and promotion then they subsequently lose their appeal then they are re-relegated back to the Ryman with the losing finalists promoted in their place?"

No. No. No.
In this case we would be penalised because we would have played them first. Why should the final be null and void but not our semi-final?

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: What if ...

By Hendonboy27/4/2015 14:30Mon Apr 27 14:30:13 2015In response to Re: What if ...Top of thread

Views: 3904

And for that matter, why should Met Police not be in the playoffs if Enfield's appeal is dismissed?

This is arguably the best example of FA tin-pottery in recent years... at least in previous years even if decisions haven't made sense, they haven't been left so late.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: What if ...

By Griff27/4/2015 14:47Mon Apr 27 14:47:13 2015In response to Re: What if ...Top of thread

Views: 4015

Surely the final decision in the Thurrock case was left so late the fixture list sent Carshalton to East Thurrock for a Christmas fixture just in case Thurrock won their long winded appeals?

PS: Viz 1990 Football League playoffs when, despite the league being aware of Swindon's betting misdemeanours they allowed them to compete in (and win) the playoff before relegating them and promoting losing finalists Sunderland instead.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1990_Football_League_play-offs

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: What if ...

By mello27/4/2015 16:49Mon Apr 27 16:49:37 2015In response to Re: What if ...Top of thread

Views: 3867

We beat Enfield and then win the play-off final get promoted, Enfield then get 3 points deducted placing Met Police in the final play-off place......and they lodge an appeal !!!!!!!! Or is that going just a step too far???? :)

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: What if ...

By Hendonboy27/4/2015 16:52Mon Apr 27 16:52:01 2015In response to Re: What if ...Top of thread

Views: 3865

Well, exactly, and that's why the playoffs can't happen until due process has been completed. Which should have happened months ago since this apparently came to light in January.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: What if ...

By Griff27/4/2015 17:03Mon Apr 27 17:03:28 2015In response to Re: What if ...Top of thread

Views: 3976

And now the Middlesex Charity Cup final has been postponed as the chap concerned played in Enfield Town's quarter final win while he was supposed to be suspended. Question is why the MFA are now acting on this. Surely they would have been made aware at the time, wouldn't they?

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: What if ...

By Gareth Coates (beano)27/4/2015 21:16Mon Apr 27 21:16:17 2015In response to Re: What if ...Top of thread

Views: 3962

No, the Middlesex FA weren't made aware of the situation at the time. Discipline for First Teams at Steps 1-4 is managed by The FA alone, without reference to County FAs. However, The FA only accepts discipline reports for one Senior Cup per County FA, which in Middlesex is the Senior Challenge Cup.

Therefore, the first time Middlesex FA became aware of the situation was when The FA found Enfield Town guilty of playing a player under suspension. Once it became apparent that the alleged offence took place in early January, Middlesex FA opened an investigation, which cannot proceed until the existing processes have been completed.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: What if ...

By Middx Wanderer28/4/2015 06:14Tue Apr 28 06:14:49 2015In response to Re: What if ...Top of thread

Views: 3807

Surely if the player had eleven bookings when he joined from VCD. The suspension should already of happened. , ie between bookings 10 & 11. So VCD should be charged. This certainly has nothing to do with the middx county cup , but well done Middx FA for embarrassing themselves along with the FA.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: What if ...

By Gareth Coates (beano)28/4/2015 08:07Tue Apr 28 08:07:16 2015In response to Re: What if ...Top of thread

Views: 4022

Actually, the player picked up his tenth booking on 20th December. At this level, suspensions start 14 days after the offence so his ban should have started on 3rd January. According to the ETFC website, the player made his debut for them (and was booked) at Ashford in the Charity Cup on 6th January, when he should have been suspended.

Therefore, this case does have a bearing on the Charity Cup.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: What if ...

By Middx Wanderer28/4/2015 09:32Tue Apr 28 09:32:37 2015In response to Re: What if ...Top of thread

Views: 3712

So if that's a fact they are expelled from the competition. Oh No. After all these facts were know months ago
Middx FA should be supporting their clubs not digging a bigger hole for the end of season chaos to fall into

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: What if ...

By Hendonboy28/4/2015 09:52Tue Apr 28 09:52:47 2015In response to Re: What if ...Top of thread

Views: 3679

I don't think the Middlesex FA have any choice. As things stand, Enfield have been found guilty of playing an ineligible player by the FA, but have the right of appeal. Until that whole process has been completed, Middx would be pre-judging the outcome of the appeals process by doing anything other than delaying their decision.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: What if ...

By Gareth Coates (beano)28/4/2015 09:52Tue Apr 28 09:52:13 2015In response to Re: What if ...Top of thread

Views: 3690

As I've said, because Middlesex FA does not have access to the disciplinary cases managed by The FA, it was not aware of the issue. Had Middlesex FA been made aware of the problem in January, then it would have been addressed then.

Because the problem has come to light now, it needs to be dealt with in a manner appropriate to the Cup Rules because any inconsistency in their application could be used as a precedent by clubs to try to circumvent the rules in any of the other 23 Cups run by Middlesex FA.

All MFA can do now is wait for The FA to sort the issue out and then act accordingly.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: What if ...

By Middx Wanderer28/4/2015 10:10Tue Apr 28 10:10:55 2015In response to Re: What if ...Top of thread

Views: 4114

So what would have happened if the Final had already ben played. Surely there has to be a cut off for these things . Then a fine after a certain date, after all you are supposed to promote Football.
A competition that had very little credibility , gets two senior sides through to the final , firstly puts the final on a Monday Night at the end of a bank holiday weekend, apparently to allow people to watch other games in the afternoon when there are no games to watch ! Then calls it off altogether, If the offence was not reported at the time surely we just move on , its a cup competition. are they going to replay the 1/4 final next season ? perhaps the Final will have a double header with the 2014/15 just before kick off 2015/16 final . I personally hope the games never get played , it will be pointless .

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: What if ...

By Hendonboy28/4/2015 10:14Tue Apr 28 10:14:54 2015In response to Re: What if ...Top of thread

Views: 3756

If it'd already have been played? Enfield expelled, Harrow awarded the cup most likely. The same way that Enfield will most likely be expelled if their appeal is dismissed and whoever they beat in the semi finals would probably take their place, which seems to be the usual way these things are handled. Again, I think your anger, while justified, is mis-placed. The FA are at fault for this whole chain of events, not the county (or the league, for all they seem to have made a ridiculous decision yesterday.)

It's not unheard of to see Senior Cup finals played in pre-season - Essex have done it several times, so it could quite reasonably be treated as a curtain raiser for next season.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: What if ...

By Middx Wanderer28/4/2015 10:24Tue Apr 28 10:24:48 2015In response to Re: What if ...Top of thread

Views: 3746

Lets play the game & chuck them out later then , got to be better than no game at All , Maybe ask Ashford Town & Cockfosters if they are interested in a run out in the Final , its devalued enough, lets make it a three team tournament in the name of justice

So we can look forward to the final next season when there could be 22 players on the pitch who are not eligible to play in the 2014/15 final just because one MIGHT not have been eligible for a match that had taken place last January.
Some time next season someone will notice Ray Metz was not suspended after he was sent off against Wealdstone in 1981 , oh what fun as we re run the 81/82 competition again

reply to this article | return to the front page

No ifs, no buts.

By Jeff Hill (Malc)27/4/2015 17:50Mon Apr 27 17:50:00 2015In response to Re: What if ...Top of thread

Views: 4010

I think Maidstone should have 4 points deducted.

reply to this article | return to the front page

So many unanswered questions

By woodsy27/4/2015 21:54Mon Apr 27 21:54:08 2015In response to No ifs, no buts.Top of thread

Views: 4734

It really puzzles me that Enfield Town had a deadline of 1 April to respond to the FA charge.
See http://www.thefa.com/news/governance/2015/mar/fa-charges-suspensions-fines-march-2015

Did they respond? If so, what happened? If not, why not? Is this why the charge, which appeared to have been resolved, was reinstated?

I'm also puzzled by ET's version of the 'due diligence' story. They didn't find the player's suspension on first looking at the database. So why/how did they look again and find the other two records? Presumably, someone couldn't spell 'Tajbakhsh'?

Was the 'he can serve the suspension in the next two games' an official FA determination which resolved the issue and which the League had to accept? Presumably not - so what was it?

When will a decision be made? The only date I've seen is for a hearing no later than 30 April!

From a Hendon standpoint, games on 30 April, 4 May, 7 May would be a hard enough end to a fantastic season without this mess.

How can the play-off dates be moved? Do County Cup games take priority?

What might the recovery/preparation time be if the first play-off game is delayed?

How many players might have organised breaks/holidays/anything for the end of next week? What about contracts/insurances?

Can anyone help answer my questions?

Total shambles - and Hendon get the worst of it. Both ET and the Met can prepare to face Hendon. We don't know who we are playing - or when.

Still, I suppose the League and FA have only had three months to sort this out.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: So many unanswered questions

By Hendonboy28/4/2015 19:57Tue Apr 28 19:57:04 2015In response to So many unanswered questionsTop of thread

Views: 3738

This answers some of the questions...

www.thefa.com/~/media/files/pdf/the%20fa%202014-15/written%20reasons/enfield-town-fc-written-reasons.ashx?la=en

Still plenty unanswered, including whether Enfield should have made sure with the FA (i.e. should this be standard procedure for all registrations now?), why the FA went back on their word about not charging Enfield and why the hell this took 3 months to get to the point they were found guilty. It's certainly not as damning as the Thurrock document was.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: So many unanswered questions

By Griff28/4/2015 21:07Tue Apr 28 21:07:53 2015In response to Re: So many unanswered questionsTop of thread

Views: 3598

One question that springs to mind - what will happen to those FA individuals who seemed to have made decisions they were not entitled to do?

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: So many unanswered questions

By Hendonboy28/4/2015 21:42Tue Apr 28 21:42:18 2015In response to Re: So many unanswered questionsTop of thread

Views: 3674

Based on their job titles, I think they probably were entitled to make those decisions, they just seem to have gone back on them by then choosing to charge Enfield.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: So many unanswered questions

By Griff28/4/2015 22:03Tue Apr 28 22:03:08 2015In response to Re: So many unanswered questionsTop of thread

Views: 3641

I'd go back to the FA ruling you posted earlier and read points 23 and 24. If you read it differently to how I see it feel free to say so.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: So many unanswered questions

By Hendonboy28/4/2015 22:08Tue Apr 28 22:08:55 2015In response to Re: So many unanswered questionsTop of thread

Views: 3660

You may be right... I missed point 24 - it seems Mark Ives is "Discipline Manager" which I'd taken to mean he's in charge of such things, but that point gives a different job title. Messy.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: So many unanswered questions

By EE29/4/2015 14:46Wed Apr 29 14:46:29 2015In response to Re: So many unanswered questionsTop of thread

Views: 3708

OK - now got it , took a few days (too much sangria )but having read the FA admission of cock ups in the Regulatory Commission Document it appears they wish to excuse themselves (someones getting sacked in the morning) for getting it wrong by giving Enfield a only a warning . So be it. Let's get back to the football.
So why no news on when the games will be played ?
If they are waiting for a potential appeal , who will that be ? Enfield - unlikely, Hendon or Tonbridge asking to replay their games - interesting thought but unlikely , Met . Police - suppose they might ( would Hendon if faced with same circumstances ? probably ) Perhaps the Ryman League - can they ? or maybe other clubs that have been penalised for the ineligible player rule might feel aggrieved ,again not sure if possible , So looks like the Met are the only ones required to be consulted - surely that would only take max 48 hours anyway.

Perhaps the other solution, which I favour, is to give Hendon and Tonbridge the points from the games in question, sorts it out from my perspective.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: So many unanswered questions

By EE29/4/2015 15:54Wed Apr 29 15:54:46 2015In response to Re: So many unanswered questionsTop of thread

Views: 3582

Thought I had got it but had forgotten that the administrators, administrators had yet to administer . Apparently they have now and the Ryman League have deducted 3 points from Enfield for the same charge that the FA had issued a warning for . Suspect that an appeal is pending , not sure how long needs to be allowed for that to be heard of course that is only the Ryman League appeal , let alone any appeal to the FA , before or after that is heard. Feels like this has sometime to go to be resolved.

Please correct me if I am wrong .

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: So many unanswered questions

By Hendonboy29/4/2015 16:27Wed Apr 29 16:27:12 2015In response to Re: So many unanswered questionsTop of thread

Views: 3536

I suspect that any appeal would be to the FA rather that the league. There's little scope to argue the league have applied their rules unfairly or incorrectly; by my reading, they're very clear in that the points "shall" be deducted.

Given that they dispute the record of their meeting with the FA, their best bet might be to claim that their original hearing should be set aside for not following correct procedures, but any appeal at all will leave all five clubs in limbo for some time yet.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Re: So many unanswered questions

By rwakeley28/4/2015 08:19Tue Apr 28 08:19:55 2015In response to So many unanswered questionsTop of thread

Views: 3861

Woodsy - Excellent post - Far more eloquently composed than my feeble attempt below. I sense that already having allotted Thursday as a benchmark for Enfield's appeal the FA will already have penciled in prospective changes. Surely the discussions between both parties yesterday would have covered most of the ground as a matter of consideration. Still an outside chance for Thursday, dependent upon the FA appeals process, (which I know nothing about). Hopefully, we can all just get back to concentrating on the real job in hand.

reply to this article | return to the front page

Previous thread: Postponed by rwakeley27/4/2015 19:24Mon Apr 27 19:24:18 2015view thread