Front page news

[norwich darlo]

Darlo made the front page of the Non-League paper this morning it seems that the teams in our division are still moaning about the 12 points not taken off us and are demanding answers from the League.

[Sidarlo]

Yer there is a pretty big article inside the paper about it. Basically all the teams at the top apart from Ashton are asking why we havent had the points taken.

[dickdarlington]

Whilst I have a degree of sympathy, and I'm relieved that the league have been somewhat sensible, I have to ask what the point is of this? The league have ruled, they can't change their minds just because the other clubs have spat their dummies out.

this strikes as a non story fabricated by the paper ringing around trying to make something out of nothing.

[Darlo_Pete]

Good on Ashton for not complaining, they probably realised that it would be pointless dragging up this non-story. Like others I do sympathise with other teams. But the decision has been made now and it won't be changed.

[Darlogramps]

Workington on Twitter seem to be having a good whinge about it (although using an official Twitter account is not the most sensible or professional place to be doing that ).

As people have said, the league have made their ruling. If clubs have got an issue with it, they should either put in an official complaint/appeal or get on with it. Bleating in public several weeks after the ruling doesn't do anyone any good.

My suspicion is that there was an error on the part of the league too. Shildon got away pretty lightly as I recall.

They played him without clearance in a Durham Challenge Cup tie I believe, but were only asked to replay the match, as opposed to being thrown out of the competition.

That to me indicates there was a problem on the part of the respective leagues or organisations, as well as the clubs.

I wonder whether these clubs would be complaining if we weren't their promotion rivals. I'd venture the answer is they wouldn't care less.

[LoidLucan]

They do need to stop whining and get on with it. The other clubs are saying "Nothing against darlo but we want the League to explain how they came to the decision" while the league says it's their policy not to enter into dialogue with others after they have given a ruling.

Fact is the league took all the evidence and circumstances into account and came to what they regarded as a fair a decision. It won't be changed now so clubs like Workington, Salford, Nantwich, Blyth and Rushall need to just accept that and concentrate on the football. If they want to try to knock us out of battle for promotion they'll have to do it on the pitch rather than bleating on about a matter that has already been reasonably and fairly dealt with by an organisation that had all the facts in front of it.

[al_quaker]

Somebody needs to take the log in details off of whoever is running the Workington twitter account! It's embarrassing for them, and I'm sure will sour relations between the 2 clubs.

[dfc4me]

Think the reason the NPL refuse to explain their decision or give us a points deduction was because it was their mistake that allowed Bell to play as many games as he did. If their officials had done their job properly his lack of clearance would have been discovered after 1 or 2 matches. As it was it took 8 and would probably have been more if it hadn't been picked up by Shildon. Of course they are not going to admit that!

[theoriginalfatcat]

The clubs moaning and whining about this, really are a bunch of self centred twats.

You would think they might be pleased that the decision makers at the top have seen sense to act fairly, on what was an honest mistake, over a ridiculous rule, that in any case gave us no advantage.

But no! They seem to be taking a short sighted view that just because this rule has been acted on harshly and stupidly in the past - it will always remain that way.

I bet all the witches that were burnt, hung or drowned in the late 1600's held no malice to the ones who were later let off after the law changed.

[super_les_mcjannet]

It does seem very bitter from the clubs that are whinging after the league board has come to a decision.

Seems a genuine mistake that in reality the FA should ensure can't happen anyhow by removing this Welsh/English international clearance for clubs in the same league.

It's funny how the only ones whinging are the ones who are worried we might push them out of the play-off picture. It's got nothing to do with the rule (which they would argue against if one of their volunteer reg secretaries had made the mistake), it's purely the boards of the clubs in our big our non-league family are just looking after their own interests.

[Darlogramps]

It's funny how the only ones whinging are the ones who are worried we might push them out of the play-off picture. It's got nothing to do with the rule (which they would argue against if one of their volunteer reg secretaries had made the mistake), it's purely the boards of the clubs in our big our non-league family are just looking after their own interests.

Nail on head Les. If we were mid-table, they wouldn't care less.

[Darlofan97]

Not surprised to see some of those clubs' names on that list.

The whinging on is coming from previous precedents set, rather than the actual offence of not receiving clearance which changed nothing.

Even if we received proper international clearance for Bell, he would have played in the exact same games with the exact same outcomes. It wasn't as though he was banned from playing football in England.

Ironically, had this happened to these clubs they'd be putting exactly the same argument together. It's a silly rule to have to obtain international clearance for a player who has been playing in the English League System, and an even bigger one to deduct points, thankfully common sense has prevailed.

The Workington chairman getting heated over the League not explaining their decision is laughable. Both parties said they wouldn't comment further after the decision, and why should the League re-open a closed case? At a guess he can smell the chance of his side cementing a place in the play-offs.

[fozzovmurton]

I am not sure how I would react to be honest if it was one of our rivals, whether I would be calling for the league or club to explain the outcome.

But as far as I am aware there is nothing in the rules that states a team must be given mandatory points deduction...Cant remember the wording exactly but is it something like 'The League may/shall deduct all points from matches the ineligible player played and/or a fine when it comes to International Clearance cases...The same kind of lenient punishment handed down to Sunderland a year or 2 ago

Nothing wrong with outcome in my opinion

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk

[super_les_mcjannet]

I am not sure how I would react to be honest if it was one of our rivals, whether I would be calling for the league or club to explain the outcome.

But as far as I am aware there is nothing in the rules that states a team must be given mandatory points deduction...Cant remember the wording exactly but is it something like 'The League may/shall deduct all points from matches the ineligible player played and/or a fine.

Nothing wrong with outcome in my opinion

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk

Points have to be deducted with the exception of cases involving 'International Clearance'

The league have dealt with the issues within the rules, I presume they believe the rules are unfair for our circumstances.

6.9 PLAYING AN INELIGIBLE PLAYER
Any Club found to have played an ineligible Player in a match shall have any points gained from that match deducted from its record and have levied upon it a fine.
The Company may vary this decision in respect of the points gained only in circumstances where the ineligibility is due to the failure to obtain an International Transfer Certificate or where the ineligibility is related to the Player’s status only.
The Board may also order that such match be replayed on such terms as are decided by the Board which may also levy penalty points against the Club in default.

[HarryCharltonsCat]

If this had happened to Salford, as a club I don't think we would have made anything of it, but I bet this message board, and twitter, would have gone into meltdown - "bending over backwards for the Class of 92".

[Darlofan97]

If this had happened to Salford, as a club I don't think we would have made anything of it, but I bet this message board, and twitter, would have gone into meltdown - "bending over backwards for the Class of 92".

Most probably, but in this case it's not the opposition fans in uproar, its the actual football clubs in our league that want to see us deducted points for an error which has changed nothing.

[shawry]

its the actual football clubs in our league that want to see us deducted points for an error which has changed nothing.

Can you explain what you mean by an error thats changed nothing?

[Darlofan97]

its the actual football clubs in our league that want to see us deducted points for an error which has changed nothing.

Can you explain what you mean by an error thats changed nothing?

Well had we actually received proper International Clearance for Bell he would have still played in the exact same games, contributing the exact same, with the same results.

Basically, the outcome for not having International Clearance for Bell is exactly the same as if we actually received International Clearance for him. He wasn't banned from playing football in England, if he was I could see Nantwich, Salford etc. having a point.

[D_F_C]

If I was them, I think I would moan privately about the decision, but I wouldn't want it to be all over the front page of non league news (or whatever it's called). Debate it on the non league zone, yes. Do a big front page spread, No.

[fozzovmurton]

Until the wording around the rule is changed, this argument will be rolled out every time a similar case comes up

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk

[MKDarlo]

If this had happened to Salford, as a club I don't think we would have made anything of it, but I bet this message board, and twitter, would have gone into meltdown - "bending over backwards for the Class of 92".

exactly - we would be twisting on like mad! Although for it to come from official twitter accounts/club spokesmen is a bit silly

[theoriginalfatcat]

exactly - we would be twisting on like mad!

Speak for yourself, but not for me.

If other the clubs chairmen don't know the ins and outs of our particular case, then fans will know even less about the details.

Every case will be different -the league have looked into ours and treated us fairly, however these bitter chairman have all been frothing at the mouth with the expectation that we would be deducted points, and the maximum 12 points too!!

Because it's 12 points that Workington Chairman Heathcote keeps banging on about "there's going to be at least one club impacted if Darlington finish in the top five and are less than 12 points clear of sixth place" and then he goes on to say "It could be worse because if Darlington finish top and are less than 12 points ahead of second place, the team who finishes second will be denied automatic promotion"

I would say to Heathcote "Don't count your chickens before they hatch -you haven't lost anything so act your age"

* I'm just presuming he's not 12!

[MKDarlo]

us a sin fans not us as in club - i would expect the club to say nothing as it isn't an issue for the club to comment on

[DarloOnTheUp]

Let them twist on - it doesn't alter anything.

Meanwhile, focus on winning promotion as that would REALLY piss them off.

[al_quaker]

Fans having a moan about it - fine. It's what fans do.

The club having a public moan about it, including on twitter - pathetic.

[alec.g.white7]

I am led to believe this situation came about as the result of a simple clerical error. When Bell was registered the forms state have you played internationally and a tick was put in the NO box.Unfortunately Wales is classed as international in football terms. However there was no hidden agenda from anybody (club or player) to make a deliberate false claim ,why should they be as there was no advantage to be gained.The league made the correct ruling and that is the end of the matter. Commonsense prevailed. All those clubs who are complaining are bad losers and are doing themselves no favours.

[shawry]

its the actual football clubs in our league that want to see us deducted points for an error which has changed nothing.

Can you explain what you mean by an error thats changed nothing?

Well had we actually received proper International Clearance for Bell he would have still played in the exact same games, contributing the exact same, with the same results.

Basically, the outcome for not having International Clearance for Bell is exactly the same as if we actually received International Clearance for him. He wasn't banned from playing football in England, if he was I could see Nantwich, Salford etc. having a point.

Surely the fact that we didn't have International Clearance for him means that he shouldn't have played, which is upheld by the fact that we have been punished. That means that we gained points while he was playing, when he shouldn't have been.

By the same reasoning, if we did the same this season we would be deducted the 12 points, plus any other points deduction for the new offence. We got a bit lucky in that the league saw sense with how silly the rule is for welsh clubs playing in England, but I wouldn't have been surprised to have got a 12 point immediate deduction.

[offside]

Anyone seen this !

thehttp://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/sport/foo ... fixed.html

[Darlo_Pete]

Anyone seen this !

thehttp://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/sport/foo ... fixed.html

That link doesn't seem to be working for me, what does it say?

[AndyPark]

Anyone seen this !

thehttp://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/sport/foo ... fixed.html

That link doesn't seem to be working for me, what does it say?

A NON-LEAGUE game is being investigated by the FA amid fears it was fixed.

Uefa tipped them off about possible problems with Ashton United’s home clash with Rushall Olympic last April.

The pair play in the Evo-Stik Northern Premier — the seventh tier of English football.

Uefa monitors the top two divisions in each of its 54 member countries plus cups.

But a spokesperson told SunSport an “anonymous report received on the Uefa Integrity platform” raised the alarm about a game well below their normal level of interest.

An FA document confirmed: “In April 2015, the Association received a referral from Uefa indicating a game . . . between Ashton United and Rushall Olympic may have been the subject of manipulation (i.e. “fixed”) by players for Ashton United.”

An Ashton statement said: “We has been advised by the FA that several members of last season’s playing squad are subject to investigation in respect of betting on matches. The club is co-operating fully with the investigation.”

It is understood the probe is focused on betting rule breaches more than corruption. But, like the tennis scandal, it underlines the uncomfortable relationship between gambling and sport.

Representatives of data collection firms who provide live information to punters and/or bookies have applied for tickets at Evo-Stik Northern Premier matches.

League operations chief Alan Allcock has written to clubs advising them to be careful about who they allow in.

He said: “I understand the turnover of gambling in the Far East is bigger than McDonald’s. The majority of our players are non-contract and earn £150 a week to play football, if they are lucky.

“If someone offered one of these guys £10,000, what does the boy do?

“If someone gets at an individual they know is weak financially, sometimes people can be tempted into doing something they shouldn’t.”