This forum is for the discussion of women's football, the fastest growing participation sport in Australia. This includes local women's football and the A-League Women.
Drusetta wrote:Judging by the comments to date, can anyone shed any light as to why there have been so many "errors" so far this season?
I'm sure it is extremely rare that any team has deliberately cheated, to gain an advantage.
Even with unregistered players - I thought there was some 3 game "guest" rule. Does this still apply in season 2012?
Is the error quantity unusually high this season, compared to other seasons?
If so, what has changed that may have contributed to the amount of errors?
If not, then it begs the same question, what has changed?
Apart from greater scrutiny, what other actions can be taken to minimise these types of errors?
Acknowledge and address the errors by all means, but it would also be of benefit to focus on solutions as well.
Just a thought.
It seems Drussetta that all the drama follows you at whatever club you go to, :roll:Poor campbeltown
What a ridiculus statement! Regardless if you were joking or not, that's an extremely stupid comment.
In regards to the topic on hand, it's in the past so how about we all move on. It doesn't look like the FFSA are going to provide any answers so there's no point fussing over something that is beyond our control.
Drusetta wrote:Judging by the comments to date, can anyone shed any light as to why there have been so many "errors" so far this season?
I'm sure it is extremely rare that any team has deliberately cheated, to gain an advantage.
Even with unregistered players - I thought there was some 3 game "guest" rule. Does this still apply in season 2012?
Is the error quantity unusually high this season, compared to other seasons?
If so, what has changed that may have contributed to the amount of errors?
If not, then it begs the same question, what has changed?
Apart from greater scrutiny, what other actions can be taken to minimise these types of errors?
Acknowledge and address the errors by all means, but it would also be of benefit to focus on solutions as well.
Just a thought.
It seems Drussetta that all the drama follows you at whatever club you go to, :roll:Poor campbeltown
What a ridiculus statement! Regardless if you were joking or not, that's an extremely stupid comment.
In regards to the topic on hand, it's in the past so how about we all move on. It doesn't look like the FFSA are going to provide any answers so there's no point fussing over something that is beyond our control.
Thats the issue Slazenger ... how do clubs move on, if the rules are no longer 'black & white'??? In the space of a week, we have seen the rule applied to Uni one way, and in the exact same circumstance, applied another way to Fulham.
scipio africanus wrote:
Thats the issue Slazenger ... how do clubs move on, if the rules are no longer 'black & white'??? In the space of a week, we have seen the rule applied to Uni one way, and in the exact same circumstance, applied another way to Fulham.
The difference being that Fulham choose to respect the rule, admitted the mistake & accepted the consequences.
scipio africanus wrote:
Thats the issue Slazenger ... how do clubs move on, if the rules are no longer 'black & white'??? In the space of a week, we have seen the rule applied to Uni one way, and in the exact same circumstance, applied another way to Fulham.
The difference being that Fulham choose to respect the rule, admitted the mistake & accepted the consequences.
Uni didn't.
exactly ... but the problem now is, you can bypass the rule if you come up with a good enough excuse. Thats why earlier posts about it being a very dangerous precedence is more than valid. Fulham made an honest mistake, but they didn't get their points back. We can't have the same scenario applied differently in a space of a week!
scipio africanus wrote:
Thats the issue Slazenger ... how do clubs move on, if the rules are no longer 'black & white'??? In the space of a week, we have seen the rule applied to Uni one way, and in the exact same circumstance, applied another way to Fulham.
The difference being that Fulham choose to respect the rule, admitted the mistake & accepted the consequences.
Uni didn't.
exactly ... but the problem now is, you can bypass the rule if you have people within your club close to association members.
Edit for accuracy
SAASL SUNDAY PREMIER LEAGUE CHAMPION 2010 2011 SAASL CHALLENGE CUP WINNER 2008 2010 2011 SAASL CHAMPION OF CHAMPIONS WINNER 2010 SAASL CICHANOWSKI SHIELD WINNER 2009 2011 2012
Fulham didn't appeal beacuase they couldn't, the rule had changed to be the same as the Men's Rules.
The Rule was changed after Uni appealed and the loophole was closed, and now it is black & white, no arguments.
If you play a player that's not on the team sheet, then you lose 3-0. End of story.
I am think Metro have lost their $250 IMO. Like i said earlier, replay the game then there's no excuses.
Fatboy wrote:Fulham didn't appeal beacuase they couldn't, the rule had changed to be the same as the Men's Rules.
The Rule was changed after Uni appealed and the loophole was closed, and now it is black & white, no arguments.
If you play a player that's not on the team sheet, then you lose 3-0. End of story.
I am think Metro have lost their $250 IMO. Like i said earlier, replay the game then there's no excuses.
We will wait and see the outcome.
sorry i didnt realise the rule had been changed... its good that it has, but it should definately mean that it should apply to Uni.
I would love for the match to be replayed... as long as its not on a Sunday & not somewhere like Burton so that its easy to get there and watch!
Fatboy wrote:Fulham didn't appeal beacuase they couldn't, the rule had changed to be the same as the Men's Rules.
The Rule was changed after Uni appealed and the loophole was closed, and now it is black & white, no arguments.
If you play a player that's not on the team sheet, then you lose 3-0. End of story.
I am think Metro have lost their $250 IMO. Like i said earlier, replay the game then there's no excuses.
We will wait and see the outcome.
how can you seriously let Uni walk, and two weeks later close the books on Fulham? What competition is being run here??
Fatboy wrote:Fulham didn't appeal beacuase they couldn't, the rule had changed to be the same as the Men's Rules.
The Rule was changed after Uni appealed and the loophole was closed, and now it is black & white, no arguments.
If you play a player that's not on the team sheet, then you lose 3-0. End of story.
I am think Metro have lost their $250 IMO. Like i said earlier, replay the game then there's no excuses.
We will wait and see the outcome.
how can you seriously let Uni walk, and two weeks later close the books on Fulham? What competition is being run here??
How did the rule change? I thought it was black and white before too...what's the change, can anyone explain? And...what was the loophole? And yes, if it's different now, Metro are now appealing with the new rule that HAS to apply to Uni too, since they are still competing in the same league. No team should be different.
It's a really sad situation. For example, if half way through the year they decide to get rid of goal difference, then all goal difference has to be taken away, not only from that date onwards. Here is a chance for FFSA to do something good...especially after they made some positive changes to the game...hopefully they won't miss it again...People are fed up with this kind of shiraz.
ball_girl wrote:a better question may be "whose running the competition here?"
Totally agree! Everybody knows that this rule in the end will not apply to "that" particular team...it would actually show some fairness on behalf of FFSA but it would upset some "intimate friends" of some "important people" If you didn't know better you would actually think "why does THAT particular team get such favoritism"??? But it's the same that happened many times with state selection and a whole lot of other cr@p... Same old same old I guess...
ball_girl wrote:a better question may be "whose running the competition here?"
Totally agree! Everybody knows that this rule in the end will not apply to "that" particular team...it would actually show some fairness on behalf of FFSA but it would upset some "intimate friends" of some "important people" If you didn't know better you would actually think "why does THAT particular team get such favoritism"??? But it's the same that happened many times with state selection and a whole lot of other cr@p... Same old same old I guess...
Interesting point is that I heard some other clubs (outside of Metro and Uni) are far from happy with what has unfolded here.
I do agree, now is an excellent opportunity for FFSA to intervene and uphold the laws as custodians of the game.
They finally listened to the clubs and as a result the new league structure seems to be going well. FFSA would be well advised to listen to their stakeholders again.
ball_girl wrote:a better question may be "whose running the competition here?"
Totally agree! Everybody knows that this rule in the end will not apply to "that" particular team...it would actually show some fairness on behalf of FFSA but it would upset some "intimate friends" of some "important people" If you didn't know better you would actually think "why does THAT particular team get such favoritism"??? But it's the same that happened many times with state selection and a whole lot of other cr@p... Same old same old I guess...
Interesting point is that I heard some other clubs (outside of Metro and Uni) are far from happy with what has unfolded here.
I do agree, now is an excellent opportunity for FFSA to intervene and uphold the laws as custodians of the game.
They finally listened to the clubs and as a result the new league structure seems to be going well. FFSA would be well advised to listen to their stakeholders again.
That's all you hear about these days! I personally know of at least 3 Prem clubs but also some social clubs that have extremely strong opinions about this. They don't really have anything to do with this particular incident but hate to see double standards and to feel like there are rules that certain people (always the same) can bend when they want to...
I'm affiliated with a social club in the lower grades and we are far from impressed as well, but I heard along the grapevine that some Prem clubs are furious (and I'm not talking Metro!).
The problem here is simple. get rid of the people runing the laegue. been there too long , looks like another Titanic movie is on the cards, please do us all a favour, get rid off the dead wood !!!
M@rvin wrote:Rumor has it that the appeal against the Appeal Board decision was successful.
Can anyone confirm that this is true? We can only hope it is and that sanity has prevailed!
Are you sure this is true???
1 Adelaide City 6 6 0 0 18
2 Adelaide Uni 6 5 0 1 15
3 Fulham United 6 3 2 1 11
4 Cumberland 6 3 1 2 10
5 MUWFC Magic 6 3 1 2 10
This is what they have on the web...
Fatboy wrote:Fulham didn't appeal beacuase they couldn't, the rule had changed to be the same as the Men's Rules.
The Rule was changed after Uni appealed and the loophole was closed, and now it is black & white, no arguments.
If you play a player that's not on the team sheet, then you lose 3-0. End of story.
I am think Metro have lost their $250 IMO. Like i said earlier, replay the game then there's no excuses.
We will wait and see the outcome.
Could some one explain what the loophole was that allowed Uni to appeal
The goalkeeper is the jewel in the crown and getting at him should be almost impossible. It's the biggest sin in football to make him do any work.
Fatboy wrote:Fulham didn't appeal beacuase they couldn't, the rule had changed to be the same as the Men's Rules.
The Rule was changed after Uni appealed and the loophole was closed, and now it is black & white, no arguments.
If you play a player that's not on the team sheet, then you lose 3-0. End of story.
I am think Metro have lost their $250 IMO. Like i said earlier, replay the game then there's no excuses.
We will wait and see the outcome.
Could some one explain what the loophole was that allowed Uni to appeal
+1
This is really important IMO as looking at the rules BEFORE the incident it never looked like there were any loopholes.
Interesting to see what this loophole that allowed Uni to go so far in claiming "illlegal" points was... :?
Shouldn't FFSA explain this stuff to clubs, even just out of courtesy, or is it OK for them to be so secretive about the way they run the game?
49. Team Sheets & Match Reports
(1) Each Club shall hand to the Referee a completed team sheet containing the correct names and
initials in block letters, the registered numbers and shirt numbers of the club's players taking part
in the match, the club's nominated substitutes for the match and the names of the club coach,
manager and ground stewards at least 30 minutes prior to the commencement of the game,
where possible. No game is to commence prior to the Referee receiving the team sheets from
both teams.
If a situation occurs where a club may need to make an amendment to a team sheet that has
already been submitted to the match official, a club official may approach the match official prior
to the commencement of the game to make the amendment. Once the game has commenced no
amendments will be permitted to the team sheet.
Penalty for Incomplete Team Sheets
Level 2 fine – Elite Division Teams
Level 1 – All other teams
(2) A Club shall not play in any match a player who is not named on the team sheet for the match.
Penalty – The team will forfeit the game and will be issued with a Level 2 fine.
(3) The Referee shall enter the relevant information on the team sheets and dispatch them to the
Competition Administrator within 48 hours. Where a game is played mid-week the match sheets
shall be submitted within 24 hours of the end of the match to which the team sheets relate. At the
completion of each match, an official from each competing Club shall attend the Referee's room
Para 2 was in place at the time of the round two game, 15 Apr 12.
The goalkeeper is the jewel in the crown and getting at him should be almost impossible. It's the biggest sin in football to make him do any work.
If you didn't know better you would actually think "why does THAT particular team get such favoritism"??? 
But it's the same that happened many times with state selection and a whole lot of other cr@p... 
Same old same old I guess...
