Just a thought

safc-noggieland

safc-noggieland

Well-Known Member
Jan 26, 2011
1,029
1,188
113
norway - kolbotn
Why can’t we play Max Power tonight?
If the owldfarts at the FA in their wisdom say this is not a class1 game there does not count in his enforced football ban then logically he should be allowed to play. I am not suggesting he should only that he could. What think yous ?
 
Iirc Powers last suspension covered the game v Stoke and we couldn't include it as part of his three match ban AND he wasn't allowed to play as he was suspended.
None of that makes sense and Jack Ross expressed a similar thought as it is unfair, however I think it also affected Southend who had two players suspended and were in the same boat as us.
None of this makes any sense but we are dealing with the upper echelon of football authority here which says everything.
 
  • Like
Reactions: clockstander
cumbrianmackem said:
Iirc Powers last suspension covered the game v Stoke and we couldn't include it as part of his three match ban AND he wasn't allowed to play as he was suspended.
None of that makes sense and Jack Ross expressed a similar thought as it is unfair, however I think it also affected Southend who had two players suspended and were in the same boat as us.
None of this makes any sense but we are dealing with the upper echelon of football authority here which says everything.
Click to expand...
Upper echelons is that a synonym for ‘owldfarts’. They have in my memory been anything other than antagonistic and at times downright nasty to SAFC. Perhsps some can find instances to counter my belief. I away an oracle.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cumbrianmackem
safc-noggieland said:
Upper echelons is that a synonym for ‘owldfarts’. They have in my memory been anything other than antagonistic and at times downright nasty to SAFC. Perhsps some can find instances to counter my belief. I away an oracle.
Click to expand...

Learn to type man, its haway <cheers>
 
Not supporting the decision process, but the idea is that "using up" a suspension in a Chekatrade match is unfair on those L1 and L2 clubs not invited to take part, but playing is not right as the player is suspended. So you get the worst of both worlds.
 
Expat-Cat said:
Not supporting the decision process, but the idea is that "using up" a suspension in a Chekatrade match is unfair on those L1 and L2 clubs not invited to take part, but playing is not right as the player is suspended. So you get the worst of both worlds.
Click to expand...
All L1 and L2 clubs take part though don't they? The Checkatrade is just the old Associate Member's Cup so by definition is the clubs in L1 and L2 (and now the invited u21 sides)
 
The Norton Cat said:
All L1 and L2 clubs take part though don't they? The Checkatrade is just the old Associate Member's Cup so by definition is the clubs in L1 and L2 (and now the invited u21 sides)
Click to expand...
Just looked up the rules, and yes you are correct. It's just the academies of Premier clubs or some such that are invited. So there's not even a twisted logic in the ruling
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back