Newest article: Re: PA system at SJP by ktfcprogrammes7328/9/2023 23:09Thu Sep 28 23:09:24 2023view thread
Oldest article: "Hither & Thither"? by alan ainsworth24/11/2013 12:59Sun Nov 24 12:59:08 2013view thread
Next thread: Ryman League - total confusion? by John Fordham29/4/2015 20:35Wed Apr 29 20:35:31 2015view thread
It`s Met Police ..........
Views: 5489
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!!!!!
Play awf's
Views: 5538
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!
Re: Play awf's
Views: 5233
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.
Re: Play awf's
Views: 5458
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'?
Re: Play awf's
Views: 5337
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
Re: Play awf's
Views: 5553
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.
Latest for Enfield
Views: 5337
Re: Latest for Enfield
Views: 5191
Nice of Enfield to offer to play the game v Hendon again. Will they give us the gate money too?!!
A balanced view
Views: 5154
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.
Re: A balanced view
Views: 5085
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!
Re: A balanced view
Views: 5319
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
Re: A balanced view
Views: 5348
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.
Re: A balanced view
Views: 5015
A mate of mine from Enfield reckons there's no way the playoff game will be played on Thursday...
What if ...
Views: 5012
? 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.
Re: What if ...
Views: 4933
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?
Re: What if ...
Views: 4891
"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?
Re: What if ...
Views: 4919
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.
Re: What if ...
Views: 5054
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
Re: What if ...
Views: 4902
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???? :)
Re: What if ...
Views: 4895
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.
Re: What if ...
Views: 5029
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?
Re: What if ...
Views: 4980
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.
Re: What if ...
Views: 4839
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.
Re: What if ...
Views: 5061
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.
Re: What if ...
Views: 4747
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
Re: What if ...
Views: 4721
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.
Re: What if ...
Views: 4725
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.
Re: What if ...
Views: 5127
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 .
Re: What if ...
Views: 4775
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.
Re: What if ...
Views: 4767
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
No ifs, no buts.
Views: 5042
I think Maidstone should have 4 points deducted.
So many unanswered questions
Views: 5831
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.
Re: So many unanswered questions
Views: 4785
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.
Re: So many unanswered questions
Views: 4619
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?
Re: So many unanswered questions
Views: 4685
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.
Re: So many unanswered questions
Views: 4679
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.
Re: So many unanswered questions
Views: 4700
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.
Re: So many unanswered questions
Views: 4748
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.
Re: So many unanswered questions
Views: 4597
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 .
Re: So many unanswered questions
Views: 4565
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.
Re: So many unanswered questions
Views: 4908
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.
Previous thread: Postponed by rwakeley27/4/2015 19:24Mon Apr 27 19:24:18 2015view thread