Hearts fielded ineligible player against Cove Rangers

[All roads lead to Gorgie]

29 minutes ago, Scnorthedinburgh said:

Why would facilities management and development analysis involve the playing side of the club.

Some fans just love us to **** up so they can have a moan.

Shit happens get over it, onwards and upwards.

No true fan loves us to****up so they can have a moan as you put it but this is not Russia though and where we think things need improved it is alright to question surely. 

[Poseidon]

21 minutes ago, Scnorthedinburgh said:

Nope as we would in all faith attend a game in a comp we had a chance of winning. 

If on Monday they rule something from the previous week made the game pointless as we were out the comp, they would have to explain why the match went ahead as a dead rubber. Why would I travel to a game in a comp we were not in when the game took place.

Sorry, misread before, understand now. Fingers crossed it doesn't come to it!

[SUTOL]

2 minutes ago, Scnorthedinburgh said:

Fat fingers small phone and our stupid mix of football authorities. 

That better?

 

So SPFL.

 

Thanks, was wondering if it was someone else. 

[el_jambo74]

No sporting advantage was gained. We played a player who was signed. He was our player. Hearts didn’t do this to gain an advantage. A fine would be fair but I suspect they’ll award Cove the game. 

[Jambojay84]

I might be misunderstanding this but after reading the statement it seems to me there was an error on our part and theirs, I would've thought 1 of the blazers would check the site or documents to verify it was done correctly and it only comes to light now. Happy to be corrected if wrong 

[Hungry hippo]

7 minutes ago, Geoff Kilpatrick said:

When is this hypothetical replay? Given that they make the draw after the last fixture next weekend, there is no way of shoehorning it in.

In theiry it could be Wednesday or Thursday but Im starting to expect a 3 point deduction.

 

The only caveat is that Cove would prefer a replay to that option which is why it has a 10% chance. Also, with Doncaster's comments after the Challenge Cup game which I suspect we'll quote at the meeting. 

[scott herbertson]

1 minute ago, Jambojay84 said:

I might be misunderstanding this but after reading the statement it seems to me there was an error on our part and theirs, I would've thought 1 of the blazers would check the site or documents to verify it was done correctly and it only comes to light now. Happy to be corrected if wrong 

 

The way I read it we didn't submit the paperwork, so it's just us in the wrong

[Scnorthedinburgh]

2 minutes ago, All roads lead to Gorgie said:

No true fan loves us to****up so they can have a moan as you put it but this is not Russia though and where we think things need improved it is alright to question surely. 

No problem with your point. But do you not find this place a bit negative when we are all jambos?

I can understand wanting us to be the best in every department and on the pitch. But this reaction is over the top.

Should not happen, but it does. Happens twice I will join the people going a wee bit mental.

[Bellion]

3 minutes ago, Hungry hippo said:

In theiry it could be Wednesday or Thursday but Im starting to expect a 3 point deduction.

 

The only caveat is that Cove would prefer a replay to that option which is why it has a 10% chance. Also, with Doncaster's comments after the Challenge Cup game which I suspect we'll quote at the meeting. 

We’ve got Cowdenbeath on Tuesday. There won’t be a replay. Even if there was time for one, I very much doubt they’d go for it.

[Peebo]

Amateurs. Absolute ****ing amateurs. 

[Jambojay84]

1 minute ago, scott herbertson said:

 

The way I read it we didn't submit the paperwork, so it's just us in the wrong

Thanks for the reply mate, I'm not entirely sure how the process works but hopefully we learn from this 

[Scnorthedinburgh]

8 minutes ago, SUTOL said:

 

So SPFL.

 

Thanks, was wondering if it was someone else. 

No problem. Think we all have our fingers crossed.

[stuart500]

I think it will depend on Cove's result on Saturday.

If they lose they are effectively out, so it would be likely the 3-0 would be given to them. 

If they win, a replay would be fairer to the other teams in the section, than giving them the advantage of the 3- 0 win over us.

[scott herbertson]

5 minutes ago, Jambojay84 said:

Thanks for the reply mate, I'm not entirely sure how the process works but hopefully we learn from this 

 

 

Certainly hope so - it's an amateurish mistake to make, but a mistake and not a deliberate ploy so let' hope the authorities are lenient to us

[Hungry hippo]

4 minutes ago, Bellion said:

We’ve got Cowdenbeath on Tuesday. There won’t be a replay. Even if there was time for one, I very much doubt they’d go for it.

 

I don't expect a replay but  we'd settle for squeezing the extra game in between our games if the alternative was giving away the points.

[sadj]

22 minutes ago, Victorian said:

Thankfully it's just the imbeciles at the SPFL who will decide our fate.     Not the demented inhabitants on here.

???

[All roads lead to Gorgie]

3 minutes ago, Scnorthedinburgh said:

No problem with your point. But do you not find this place a bit negative when we are all jambos?

I can understand wanting us to be the best in every department and on the pitch. But this reaction is over the top.

Should not happen, but it does. Happens twice I will join the people going a wee bit mental.

I know sometimes it seems like every small detail like the colour of glass panels in the new stand or some other trivial matter is discussed and criticized to a point where you just want to throw up but where we are in danger of being fined or dropping points then I don't mind fingers being pointed a little bit anyway. Onwards and upwards as you say for club in the seasons ahead.

[luckydug]

Someone should open a book on the possible outcomes.

Any one offering odds on Hearts getting emptied out the competition but being made to honour their fixtures so as not to upset BT.☺

[Francis Albert]

44 minutes ago, luckyBatistuta said:

Surely a replay so that Cove get their fair chance to win the game against a correct squad, plus we get a fine for breaking the rules would be the best for all.

So as a punishment we get a chance to boost our goal difference? Best for all???

[Bellion]

10 minutes ago, Hungry hippo said:

 

I don't expect a replay but  we'd settle for squeezing the extra game in between our games if the alternative was giving away the points.

I’d take it over a 3-0 defeat for sure but I think it’s too much hassle to organise at less than a week’s notice, even if everyone was up for 3 games in 6 days. 

 

More importantly, from the SFA’s perspective it would mean that the next time somebody ****s up, there’s a precedent there to say they can just replay the game. They won’t allow it and tbh I don’t think they should.

[JamboGraham]

1 hour ago, Taffin said:

 

 

We did gain a sporting advantage though. We played a player that our manager wanted to that we were not allowed to.

 

If the shoe was in the other foot i would be arguing we had been cheated. I don't think breaking the laws of the game albeit unintentionally can be called anything other than cheating.

 

I agree, I don’t think the ‘no sporting advantage’ card can be played as the player took part in the match. In both previous cases in the group stages the players were unused subs.

 

We will get a fine but as the player took part in the match I suspect there has to be an additional punishment due to the fact that we gained a sporting advantage.

[Bongo 1874]

Can't see us getting thrown out fine at most 

[luckyBatistuta]

2 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

So as a punishment we get a chance to boost our goal difference? Best for all???

 

Is that guaranteed that we boost our goal difference? Cove get another chance to get something from the game? Is it best for all the others for Cove to get a 3-0 win? 

[luckyBatistuta]

37 minutes ago, Morgan said:

Och,  let’s all go to Marmaris and sort things out.  

 

‘Sounds like a plan  

[Bellion]

https://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/teams/albion-rovers/albion-rovers-booted-out-of-irn-bru-cup-for-fielding-ineligible-player-1-4541179

 

It’s basically the same as this situation. Forfeit the game - note Albion were only kicked out because theirs was a knockout game - and a small fine. Their player was also a member of their youth team, not a new signing.

 

Ridiculous for a full-time team to end up in this situation. Sunday League bollocks. 

[Eldar Hadzimehmedovic]

41 minutes ago, Victorian said:

Thankfully it's just the imbeciles at the SPFL who will decide our fate.     Not the demented inhabitants on here.

 

You have a hissy fit at literally every opinion written on here. Somebody could say they wish we had brought on player A instead of player B, or they prefer salt and vinegar to cheese and onion, and you'd come steamrollering in with all guns blazing, calling them every insult under the sun. 

[i8hibsh]

The more I think about this the more annoyed I get. Just when I think we are becoming a well run club. On the field matters really are an after thought with our club nowadays.

 

 

Sorry 600 fans who took days off work and spent shit loads of money. Was a void trip. Sorry to our two debutants who scored their first competitive goals for us, you have now yet to get off the mark. Sorry fans but we have failed in the league cup yet again. I am utterly raging at this shambles as our rivals just scored 12 goals in Europe. We are all about Save the Children and everything else just seems to get in the way.

[S Form]

The sensible and proportionate punishment would be awarding of the game to Cove and perhaps a small fine. This would be the outcome that’s least complicated from an administrative point of view and would certainly please one of the important parties here - BT. It would mean our final game against Inverness, which they’re televising is even more important than it was before. Meanwhile, the people calling for sackings - it was an error ffs. Demanding that heads roll is a tad over the top and pretty damn hysterical.

[sadj]

1 minute ago, Eldar Hadzimehmedovic said:

 

You have a hissy fit at literally every opinion written on here. Somebody could say they wish we had brought on player A instead of player B, or they prefer salt and vinegar to cheese and onion, and you'd come steamrollering in with all guns blazing, calling them every insult under the sun. 

?? does have a point about posters on here we are all a tad demented when it comes to HMFC

[JamboGraham]

1 minute ago, Bellion said:

I’d take it over a 3-0 defeat for sure but I think it’s too much hassle to organise at less than a week’s notice, even if everyone was up for 3 games in 6 days. 

 

More importantly, from the SFA’s perspective it would mean that the next time somebody ****s up, there’s a precedent there to say they can just replay the game. They won’t allow it and tbh I don’t think they should.

 

SPFL competition rather than the SFA.

 

The SPFL already have precedent of ordering a replay but that was for a suspended player rather than non-registered.

 

SPFL precedent if a non-registered player plays in the match is that you have the match awarded against you (also described as thrown out in a knockout match which I think is adding to concern, but expulsion in a group format would damage the integrity of the competition).

 

SPFL precedent if the player is an unused sub is a fine and the result stands.

 

I would bet that we are fined and some form of forfeiting the points won; exactly how they do this to not overly compensate Cove will be difficult as they will need to maintain fairness for the other teams in the group.

 

 

[Bongo 1874]

15 minutes ago, S Form said:

The sensible and proportionate punishment would be awarding of the game to Cove and perhaps a small fine. This would be the outcome that’s least complicated from an administrative point of view and would certainly please one of the important parties here - BT. It would mean our final game against Inverness, which they’re televising is even more important than it was before. Meanwhile, the people calling for sackings - it was an error ffs. Demanding that heads roll is a tad over the top and pretty damn hysterical.

Agree if this was to happen I would still be confident of beating the likes of raith Cowdenbeath and Inverness another thing it would do it would give the players an extra incentive to go out and destroy teams.

[Bellion]

3 minutes ago, JamboGraham said:

 

SPFL competition rather than the SFA.

 

The SPFL already have precedent of ordering a replay but that was for a suspended player rather than non-registered.

 

SPFL precedent if a non-registered player plays in the match is that you have the match awarded against you (also described as thrown out in a knockout match which I think is adding to concern, but expulsion in a group format would damage the integrity of the competition).

 

SPFL precedent if the player is an unused sub is a fine and the result stands.

 

I would bet that we are fined and some form of forfeiting the points won; exactly how they do this to not overly compensate Cove will be difficult as they will need to maintain fairness for the other teams in the group.

 

 

The same thing has happened in the Challenge Cup. Livingston fielded a suspended player against Crusaders the year before last and were ordered to replay the game. 

 

Suspended player = replay

unregistered player = forfeit

unused sub = fine because no sporting advantage gained

 

It’s straightforward. I don’t think it matters whether the SFA or SPFL are technically in charge.

 

There’s no chance of being expelled from the competition. Teams are only expelled when they forfeit a game that leads to them being ‘expelled’, i.e. a knockout game. 

 

We’re losing the game and getting a fine. FWIW I think i8 is spot on here. Total joke.

[black stump]

5 hours ago, Robbo51 said:

How can a club of our size let this happen nowadays 

Ridiculous. What is the point of the manager and players giving their all when the  office staff **** up like this?..

 

[NANOJAMBO]

5 hours ago, CJGJ said:

Here's a prime example from last season...we could well be leaving the league cup

 

The Scottish Professional Football League has opened disciplinary proceedings against Albion Rovers, after the League One side fielded an ineligible player during their Challenge Cup victory over Spartans.

Liam McGuigan was on the Rovers bench for the first-round tie on Tuesday.

The midfielder's team won 5-4 on penalties after a goalless 120 minutes.

Both teams will be entered in Thursday's second-round draw, pending the outcome of the proceedings.

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/40951947

 

Albion Rovers have been thrown out of the Scottish Challenge Cup and fined £2,000 for fielding an unregistered player in their win over Spartans.

It means the Lowland League side will instead host Linfield in the second round on 2 September.

The Wee Rovers won the tie on 15 August on penalties after a 0-0 draw, but 18-year-old debutant Liam McGuigan had not been registered.

He had previously been part of the League One club's development squad.

Rovers, who are managed by former Motherwell and Scotland midfielder Brian Kerr, pleaded guilty to a breach of the competition's regulations at a Scottish Professional Football League hearing.

The governing body annulled the result of the first-round tie and awarded it to Spartans 3-0.

Midfielder McGuigan came on as a 71st-minute substitute for Michael Hopkins.

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/41038340

Apologies if covered further down the thread (still making my way through it) but this isn't them same thing IMO.  This is a knockout competition so by definition , if you lose the tie because of an ineligible player you lose your place in the competition. Hopefully the League Cup being a mini league format means we just lose the 3 points and  probably get a hefty fine. Hopefully. 

[Juanjo15]

2 hours ago, iwasthere1954 said:

No they didn't. Stranraer  won their game. Why do I get the impression you are loving every minute of this. It's bad enough without you rubbing it in.

 

Rubbing it in? If you where there back in 1954 I’ve too much respect to say anything more. 

[Rudy T]

I can't see how anything other than chucking us out will be fair to the other teams in the group. It's shambolic from a club our size and sow one needs to step up behind the scenes and put an end to this amatuer behavior.

[Boof]

3 minutes ago, black stump said:

Ridiculous. What is the point of the manager and players giving their all when the  office staff **** up like this?..

 

 

Because 999 times out of 1000 somebody doesn't **** up so the players give their all as they are expected and paid to do. 

[Bring Back Paulo Sergio]

3 minutes ago, NANOJAMBO said:

Apologies if covered further down the thread (still making my way through it) but this isn't them same thing IMO.  This is a knockout competition so by definition , if you lose the tie because of an ineligible player you lose your place in the competition. Hopefully the League Cup being a mini league format means we just lose the 3 points and  probably get a hefty fine. Hopefully. 

Yes the SFA didn't throw them out. Think it's pretty safe to assume we won't be thrown out either.

[JamboJen]

2 hours ago, KyleLafferty said:

SPFL Chief Executive Neil Doncaster said: “In the interests of sporting integrity and fairness to both sides, the game will be replayed.”

 

Thats what was said after livi played a suspended player in the challenge cup.

 

Same rules should apply.

The more I think about it the more it seems like the most logical conclusion. Just deducting points from us would mean Cove could argue they were hard done by because they faced the ineligible player (regardless of the fact he's not as good as the guy he replaced). Kicking us out impacts the team who finishes second as they'd have little chance of being a best runner up because they'd play one less game than the other groups. Awarding Cove a 3-0 win unfairly impacts the other two teams who are competing against Cove in the group.

 

We'll see what the SPFL think soon enough.

[true-jambo]

Sorry if this has already been mentioned, but didn't we have an issue during last year's competition, where we tried to introduce a sub wearing the wrong shirt number

[black stump]

1 minute ago, Boof said:

 

Because 999 times out of 1000 somebody doesn't **** up so the players give their all as they are expected and paid to do. 

I am just frustrated for the players, and us of course.

 

  Shambles, and must be demoralising for the guys who got the win.

[JamboGraham]

3 minutes ago, Rudy T said:

I can't see how anything other than chucking us out will be fair to the other teams in the group.

 

Why? ICT, Raith and Cowdenbeath haven’t been wronged in any way by this incident.

[1971fozzy]

55 minutes ago, el_jambo74 said:

No sporting advantage was gained. We played a player who was signed. He was our player. Hearts didn’t do this to gain an advantage. A fine would be fair but I suspect they’ll award Cove the game. 

 

This.

it wasn’t Messi FFS.  Jesus wept. An honest mistake 

[indianajones]

1 hour ago, Victorian said:

Thankfully it's just the imbeciles at the SPFL who will decide our fate.     Not the demented inhabitants on here.

 

?

[Jambo-Fox]

The League Cup has been a major disappointment to me as a Hearts supporter.

 

In my time I’ve seen Hearts in 7 Scottish Cup Finals (winning 3), but have only seen Hearts in 2 League Cup Finals losing them both! I was optimistic (until today) that this would be the season, “... and we’ve won the League Cup... ”, but now I’m not so sure!

[JamboGraham]

2 minutes ago, 1971fozzy said:

 

This.

it wasn’t Messi FFS.  Jesus wept. An honest mistake 

 

Agreed, but a palatable outcome creates a precedent that could make future “honest” mistakes worth the risk.

[Rudy T]

9 minutes ago, JamboGraham said:

 

Why? ICT, Raith and Cowdenbeath haven’t been wronged in any way by this incident.

 

They will be if cove are handed 3 points and they've all still to play us. 

[Ulysses]

3 minutes ago, Rudy T said:

 

They will be if cove are handed 3 points and they've all still to play us. 

 

Fair point, it has to be said.

[NANOJAMBO]

18 minutes ago, JamboGraham said:

 

Why? ICT, Raith and Cowdenbeath haven’t been wronged in any way by this incident.

Seems that way to me. If this was a league game and you apply the same logic that all the other teams had been wronged where would it end ? 

[JamboGraham]

7 minutes ago, Ulysses said:

 

Fair point, it has to be said.

 

Indeed...