Another rule change for next season

In addition to the minimum standard for match balls. it was also agreed that a team will now be deducted 2 points instead of 3 points for playing an ineligible player - plus any fine of course.

Examples of ineligible players are those who are suspended (which County deal with - a total of £125 in fines) and and those who are unregistered.

What do you think to the rule change?

We are one of the few Leagues who check every Team Sheet and we catch many out each season Beware

It is always a risk if you sign players on before kick off.

Its one of those things, we got caught out when we had done nothing wrong and were deducted 3 points, but then that is the risk of signing players on before kick off. Seems a shame as so many sides seem to get away with playing ringers that honest sides have been deducted points.

Why change it, it's going to promote more 'gambles' to play a ringer now, "it's OK, it's only 2 points now instead of 3"...which is now less points than a win which could decide a league title, it should be more points off, not less to put the dodgy secretaries off.

Mistake.


Also, what's this new rule about balls?

Whistle Blower wrote:

Why change it, it's going to promote more 'gambles' to play a ringer now, "it's OK, it's only 2 points now instead of 3"...which is now less points than a win which could decide a league title, it should be more points off, not less to put the dodgy secretaries off.

Mistake.


Also, what's this new rule about balls?

Totally agree i think 4 points would be better and a bigger fine for the club and a longer ban for the player depending on circumstances.

Increasing fines/points is all well and good for punishing those who deliberately play ringers, but what about those clubs who sign a player on the morning of a game, and the player tells them that they have no fines etc etc. Then as a club you hand in your forms, all is done correctly, but the player has lied/forgotten and as a result you get punished more, even though you tried to do the right thing, and essentially followed the correct procedure (only way around it is for every club to print off a list of players that are on the FA banned list on the Sunday night, but realistically, who would do this? Definitely not the clubs who would happily play a ringer)
If you increase the punishment to four points, i would guess that more clubs would then just play someone as a ringer (rather than signing on the morning of the game), under someone elses name, this will make it much more difficult for the league to prove any wrong doing unless you get photo evidence etc.
Personally i think reducing it to two points may encourage more clubs to follow the correct procedure and sign players on the morning, which should reduce the problem of ringers.

Widds wrote:

Increasing fines/points is all well and good for punishing those who deliberately play ringers, but what about those clubs who sign a player on the morning of a game, and the player tells them that they have no fines etc etc. Then as a club you hand in your forms, all is done correctly, but the player has lied/forgotten and as a result you get punished more, even though you tried to do the right thing, and essentially followed the correct procedure (only way around it is for every club to print off a list of players that are on the FA banned list on the Sunday night, but realistically, who would do this? Definitely not the clubs who would happily play a ringer)
If you increase the punishment to four points, i would guess that more clubs would then just play someone as a ringer (rather than signing on the morning of the game), under someone elses name, this will make it much more difficult for the league to prove any wrong doing unless you get photo evidence etc.
Personally i think reducing it to two points may encourage more clubs to follow the correct procedure and sign players on the morning, which should reduce the problem of ringers.

If your not sure you just don't sign players on on a sunday morning make them wait until the next game, if they want to sign on for you that much i'm sure they will wait. Maybe people should print the suspended list to make sure they are clear to play (how hard is it to do and it could save you points and fines).

dave ash wrote:

If your not sure you just don't sign players on on a sunday morning make them wait until the next game, if they want to sign on for you that much i'm sure they will wait. Maybe people should print the suspended list to make sure they are clear to play (how hard is it to do and it could save you points and fines).

Sometimes you have to sign players on the day in order to fulfill a fixture.

I personally agree that it should be reduced as a team's title/releagtion should not be decided on one player's dishonesty. Those that repeatedly 'offend' should perhaps get a greater punishment.

Ideally, each case should be looked at individually and get fines/deductions accordingly. I have a feeling that some of this may go on already...

I know what you mean Dave, but as Sparta3 says, sometimes you have to fulfil a fixture and you need to sign players on the day.
As for printing off a list of suspended players on a Saturday night or Sunday morning, i would guess a lot of people dont have a printer etc and in all fairness, would you really take the time out to do it? I think people would just play the player under a false name rather than print a full list out etc, lot less hassle isnt it? (whilst the better organised clubs who go by the rules would do it, they are not the ones you are trying to get into line....its the ones that are disorganised and/or rulebreakers that you want to play by the rules, and they wont print a list out, they will use a false name...i think....)

I agree with Sparta3 about a scaled punishment as well for repeat offenders..

in my opinion theres a big difference between playing a ringer fully knowing they are not signed on or even suspended , and signing on a player who has mislead you into believing he is debt/ suspension free, or even signed for another team in the league as happened to us in the past!!!

i know that its always hard to prove the fact that a club were duped into signing a suspended player, (they should check first admittedly, but like mentioned before its not always that easy)

scenario:
2 teams similar league records, one team plays a player under a false name and gets found out,
the next team plays a player who they signed on the morning of the game, who proves to be suspended after telling thier team he is cleared to play

they both get the same points deduction, one team is genuinely trying to go about the correct procedure, and one is showing no regard for the rules etc...

Where do you stop though, anyone who has knowingly played a ringer can just say "I didn't know" just the same as anyone who has just simply forgotten.

If thems the rules then simply don't break them, if you NEED to sign a player before a game to fulfil a fixture then you might as well wrap if you only have 8 turning up, besides, you're going to get the usual fine hammering from the league if you play with less than 11, no lino etc.

Now the "punishment" is only a poultry 2 points, more risks are going be taken, the league will have to do more checks on the increasing "dodgy" pre-game signed players, whereas if the punishment was more points then the sec probably won't risk it.


By the way..."a lot of people dont have a printer "...seriously, what's this, the 90's?

...and what is the rule on the balls?

Whistle Blower wrote:

...and what is the rule on the balls?

Grow a pair

yet another example of the need for a 'like' button on the forum!!!!

Ha ha, indeed...!

By the way..."a lot of people dont have a printer "...seriously, what's this, the 90's? [/quote]

Nope - 2011, i just dont know many people who have printers at home...you probably know a better class of people than me though, those that do have them posh printer things!!

If you can only get 8 turning up one week, it could just be down to unfortunate circumstances, i think wrapping a team because of one bad week would be slightly extreme.

As Dikenio (i believe) said, there are different circumstances, and this rule is trying to reduce the punishment on those who try to play by the rules but circumstances out of their control (a player telling a lie etc) come back and cause them problems. I would imagine that if you play a ringer ie someone not signed on at all, even on the day, then you will get more severe punishment such as loss of points, replay the game at your own costs etc. So the new rule should encourage teams to get players signed on rather than breaking the rules (which has a more severe punishment).

Regarding the balls - all clubs are expected to provide two balls of FIFA Inspected or Approved matchballs or equivalent standard (such as IMS) before a game. If they do not provide a ball to this standard i believe the referee (thats you Kimusabi) will be expected to report back to the league that the club didnt have suitable footballs. Hopefully that will help you out sweetpea.

I was under the impression that effectively the punishment would be the same in either case?
I undertsand it is reducing the punishment for those who genuinely make mistakes, but at the end of the day it's also reducing it for those who intended on playing a suspended/unregistered player regardless as it was 3 points last year?

Fair enough, prob needs a league comittee elder to clarify that one then!

Widds wrote:

By the way..."a lot of people dont have a printer "...seriously, what's this, the 90's?

Nope - 2011, i just dont know many people who have printers at home...you probably know a better class of people than me though, those that do have them posh printer things!!

If you can only get 8 turning up one week, it could just be down to unfortunate circumstances, i think wrapping a team because of one bad week would be slightly extreme.

As Dikenio (i believe) said, there are different circumstances, and this rule is trying to reduce the punishment on those who try to play by the rules but circumstances out of their control (a player telling a lie etc) come back and cause them problems. I would imagine that if you play a ringer ie someone not signed on at all, even on the day, then you will get more severe punishment such as loss of points, replay the game at your own costs etc. So the new rule should encourage teams to get players signed on rather than breaking the rules (which has a more severe punishment).

Regarding the balls - all clubs are expected to provide two balls of FIFA Inspected or Approved matchballs or equivalent standard (such as IMS) before a game. If they do not provide a ball to this standard i believe the referee (thats you Kimusabi) will be expected to report back to the league that the club didnt have suitable footballs. Hopefully that will help you out sweetpea.

Ha, edging towards a little metdown again I see there slim.

Thanks for the rule change regarding the ball situation, the refs haven't been informed about that (yet) which prompted the question...I don't report such minor offences to the league - I don't feel they need the cash as much as the clubs.

You are not wrong about that.

dan_mitchell_WRFC wrote:

You are not wrong about that.

Too true how much do you pay for your ink dan?....

Hellboy wrote:

dan_mitchell_WRFC wrote:

You are not wrong about that.

Too true how much do you pay for your ink dan?....

if u can get there go to melton road and look for a shop called ANNANDS the ink in there is 16.99 for coloured with a black too hope this helps hellboy

Thanks for the rule change regarding the ball situation, the refs haven't been informed about that (yet) which prompted the question...I don't report such minor offences to the league - I don't feel they need the cash as much as the clubs


Very benevolent of you, hopefully we will have more referees like you next season....

Widds wrote:

Very benevolent of you, hopefully we will have more referees like you next season....

Not all clubs get the benefit of my good nature...

By the way, if you need help with the quote thing - just give us a shout...

Whistle Blower wrote:

Widds wrote:

By the way..."a lot of people dont have a printer "...seriously, what's this, the 90's?

Nope - 2011, i just dont know many people who have printers at home...you probably know a better class of people than me though, those that do have them posh printer things!!

If you can only get 8 turning up one week, it could just be down to unfortunate circumstances, i think wrapping a team because of one bad week would be slightly extreme.

As Dikenio (i believe) said, there are different circumstances, and this rule is trying to reduce the punishment on those who try to play by the rules but circumstances out of their control (a player telling a lie etc) come back and cause them problems. I would imagine that if you play a ringer ie someone not signed on at all, even on the day, then you will get more severe punishment such as loss of points, replay the game at your own costs etc. So the new rule should encourage teams to get players signed on rather than breaking the rules (which has a more severe punishment).

Regarding the balls - all clubs are expected to provide two balls of FIFA Inspected or Approved matchballs or equivalent standard (such as IMS) before a game. If they do not provide a ball to this standard i believe the referee (thats you Kimusabi) will be expected to report back to the league that the club didnt have suitable footballs. Hopefully that will help you out sweetpea.

Ha, edging towards a little metdown again I see there slim.

Thanks for the rule change regarding the ball situation, the refs haven't been informed about that (yet) which prompted the question...I don't report such minor offences to the league - I don't feel they need the cash as much as the clubs.

A meltdown? Really? I thought i was very polite and also helpful in particular to you...apologies if it sounded like a rant or meltdown of some ilk, i will put emoticons on after statements to show the manner in which they are intended

Whistle Blower wrote:

Widds wrote:

Very benevolent of you, hopefully we will have more referees like you next season....

Not all clubs get the benefit of my good nature...

By the way, if you need help with the quote thing - just give us a shout...

I'm ok thanks, think i have it now...was just doing the message on my mobile and didn't quite get it right, problems of doing jobs round the house while trying to thank you. Thanks for the offer though. Much appreciated.

Not all clubs get the benefit of your good nature? Obviously there is the NRI, but any other clubs you treat differently with regards your nature? Any favourite clubs, your most hated - apart from us.

Widds wrote:

Whistle Blower wrote:

Widds wrote:

Very benevolent of you, hopefully we will have more referees like you next season....

Not all clubs get the benefit of my good nature...

By the way, if you need help with the quote thing - just give us a shout...

I'm ok thanks, think i have it now...was just doing the message on my mobile and didn't quite get it right, problems of doing jobs round the house while trying to thank you. Thanks for the offer though. Much appreciated.

Not all clubs get the benefit of your good nature? Obviously there is the NRI, but any other clubs you treat differently with regards your nature? Any favourite clubs, your most hated - apart from us.

No, ALL teams get the benefit of my good nature - including NRL - unless you're playing. When you're playing I'll look for anything to get you fined and book any of your players for the smallest thing.

Cheers then.

Haha. That's class.

Whistle Blower wrote:

Widds wrote:

Whistle Blower wrote:

Widds wrote:

Very benevolent of you, hopefully we will have more referees like you next season....

Not all clubs get the benefit of my good nature...

By the way, if you need help with the quote thing - just give us a shout...

I'm ok thanks, think i have it now...was just doing the message on my mobile and didn't quite get it right, problems of doing jobs round the house while trying to thank you. Thanks for the offer though. Much appreciated.

Not all clubs get the benefit of your good nature? Obviously there is the NRI, but any other clubs you treat differently with regards your nature? Any favourite clubs, your most hated - apart from us.

No, ALL teams get the benefit of my good nature - including NRL - unless you're playing. When you're playing I'll look for anything to get you fined and book any of your players for the smallest thing.

Cheers then.

Same as last season then

The playing of a suspended player is a matter for the County FA. See their website

As a club you are fully responsible for ensuring that your players are not suspended before you play them. If you do play a suspended player you could be facing a fine of around £75.00 and you run the risk of having points deducted by your league. Also the player will be facing a fine of around £50.00 and also potentially have his/her suspension increased.

If a case is proved ty the County FA, they issue any fines and the matter is referred back to the League to deal with the match in question and the deduction of points. If any points have been gained in the match in question, the result becomes void and the match will be replayed, without the participation of the suspended player. In addition, the offending club will now have 2 points deducted from their total. If the game in question is in a knockout cup - the team will be removed from the competition.

The playing of an unregistered player is a matter for the League. Whilst the financial punishment is nowhere as severe, it escalates on a scale for repeat offenders. The outcome regarding the game played is similar to that when a suspended player is played.

It is acknowledged that the majority of problems regarding the playing of suspended players occur with players signing immediately prior to kick off. To, hopefully reduce the problem, the number of players that can be signed in this manner is reduced to 3. Some Leagues do not permit players to be signed in this manner at all. It would be a matter for debate whether we would have more postponements for clubs unable to field a team, or more instances of unregistered players performing.

Whilst the playing of a suspended or unregistered player can be avoided, and the vast majority of teams are not troubled in this way, it is thought that a 3 point deduction was too harsh, hence the reduction to 2 points.

The League must try to maintain some standards, hence the rule book, which after all is agreed by member clubs.

The lists of Suspended Players, both for debt and onfield offences are carried on the County FA website and updated regularly, usually weekly during the season.

Referees who choose not to report breaches of Rules to the League, or onfield offences to the County FA are merely letting themselves, the League, and the County FA down. Sure, the club /player will avoid costs but such action will cause inconsistency and resentment. Referees must also officiate within the Laws of the Game, and those who do not have been referred to the League and the County FA for advice and guidance.

The new League rule regarding match ball quality was actually initiated by a member club, concerned at the quality of some of the balls they were playing with. Again to try to maintain a reasonable standard the rule of 'FIFA Approved or Inspected' was proposed and agreed by clubs. Once agreed, the League then made the offer of one such ball, free to each team, to, at least get them started - even if the first wayward shot ended in the thorn hedge.