Drama Queens face points deduction????............

Hope it's 15 points myself

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepag...p-QPR-of-promotion-to-the-Premier-League.html

 

It's just the sun setting themselves up for another "Incompetent FA bungle again" story to be published on the final day of the season.

I'll be amazed if they're given more than a fine, and maybe a meaningless points deduction (ie they win this weekend and get 3 points deducted so they're promoted anyway).

They didn't break the rules when they signed the player, the rules were changed after the transfer. They asked what they needed to do to comply with the new rules and the FA didn't bother telling them until after the rules had taken effect.

Plus, as the article says, it is impractical to apply a points penalty because of the effect of an appeal on the playoffs. They deduct enough points to cost QPR promotion and there'll be an appeal. The only option the FA will have is to delay the points penalty until next season to allow the playoffs (including the Final at the FA owned Wembley) to proceed as scheduled.

 

I agree with you in general but the FA are clamping down hard to show their authority - We'll see I suppose but I can see this happening myself.

 

I think it is a good pre-emptive piece of journalism by the Scum!

If the FA do hit DQPR wit a hefty points and fine, they can use it as a "We Told You First Scoop"!!

Or, as Ricardo says, they can run another story with the "title strap", "Incompetent FA Bungle Again!!" (TM Ricardo)

Either way that rag sells "copy". A win-win for them!!!

 

as OLM says it will be a fine, but a possible points deduction next season maybe

 

I would rather they got it next season, having a Welsh team in the English Premier League would be a bit weird(No disrespect to anyone who is Welsh)

 

3 days ago Rupert Murdoch enquired about buying the commercial rights for F1 and Bernie Ecclestone ruled it out as it would compromise the team's position in terms of getting the best deal from broadcasters if a broadcaster already owned the rights.

Now a Rupert Murdoch owned paper is calling for Bernie's footall team to be hit hard by the FA...

 

Precedence states it'll be a fine and severe reprimand, Bernie will pay it out of his petty cash tin.

 

There is no precedent.

 

So you dont think the episode around Mascherano and Tevez have no bearing on this? I think the FA will see it that way and ask Bernie for the fine.

 

We have no evidence to base an opinion on, only a biased piece in the Scum!! It looks, at the mo., as if the Murdoch Chronicle may be trying to cause a bit of unrest for ulterior motives. There may be a case to answer to, but what the final charges, if any, we must await, then we have to watch the Duffers at the F.A. cock-up as usual!!!

 

I've never read the Scum (wouldn't use it even to wipe me arse on) but we know its an issue over 3rd party ownership, and its Faurlin who's the player involved.

But yes, we shall have to wait and see what the old gits in blazers decide ultimately.

 

It appears from the Mirror ( I know, one's as bad as t'other, but) the only case that they may have to answer to is using an agent that hasn't been registered with the E.F.A., but, is registered, and acknowledged, by E.U.F.A.

But as I said before, lets wait to see what the Duffers will do????????

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/q/qpr/9473285.stm

Palios reckons a points deduction.

 

Not really no. Ignoring the agent related charges/falsified documentation charges which bear no relation to West Ham what so ever (falsified documentation being a deliberate attempt to mislead as opposed to an administrative error as in the West Ham case):

West Ham broke Premier League rules about disclosing 3rd party ownership that existed when the transfer was completed.
QPR (if found guilty) broke Football Association rules that prohibit 3rd party ownership that were introduced after the transfer was completed.

Other than the words "3rd party ownership" there are no similarities to create a precedent. The rules broken are set by different governing bodies, are of a completely different nature (one material and one administrative), and have a different status due to the times the rules were in effect. You may as well say that if I kill a Frenchman it sets a precedent for the case if you ever sack a Frenchman and he claims unfair dismissal because both cases have a Frenchman involved.

For the record I expect them to get a fine and a meaningless points penalty (denying them the title but not promotion), but there's no precedent for this case.

 

Will be interesting if DQPR parade the silverware on Sunday

 

They're more likely to parade it on Saturday.

Just been thinking about it on one of their forums, I'm hedging my bet at 10 or 15 points off next season's total.

There's a suspicion that once the league season is over and the playoffs announced (which the FL will do on Saturday/Sunday) the points can't be deducted until next season.

There may be significant flaws in the legal approach on this next bit, but I think I'm right in saying:

As it's a breach of FA rules and not FL rules the decision doesn't actually need to be fair to Cardiff/Swansea. As the FA (and FL for that matter) is a members club the rules are only an agreement between members about how they'll act so that no one member has an advantage over the others. As such I think only members are able to legally enforce them and be protected by them. A 10 point penalty for next season would only then be appealable by Norwich as they're the only FA club affected by it. I can't see them being that fussed about finishing 21st rather than 22nd that they'd take any action against the decision. If results went the right way this weekend the FA could make it 15 points off next season and Norwich would still be the only club affected (eg Reading are 14 points behind but could be 17).

Cardiff could try taking it to court, but I think that as QPR aren't guilty of anything illegal under UK law the courts would dismiss it as an internal matter for the FA and it's members to deal with. When Sheff U took West Ham to the courts it was because they were claiming breach of contract by West Ham for breaking the PL rules to which they'd both agreed to be bound. As an FA rule is what's been broken there's no contract between Cardiff and QPR regarding the rules being stuck to. Had it been FL rules that had been breached it would be a different matter because the Welsh clubs are members of that particular club and would be protected.

Like I say, the legal bit might be bollocks, there might be some FL rule that says all members will follow the rules of their respective FAs which would mean there was a contract between Cardiff and QPR in this case, if ther eisn't I'm pretty sure what I said is right despite basing it on what I know about Scots law (I'm assuming at that basic level English law is the same).