Hearts fielded ineligible player against Cove Rangers

[Gambo]

9 hours ago, stuart500 said:

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

 

That would make any decision wrong.

It should have zero to do with how a team are doing or even who the team is.

 

What happens to Hearts will be a bench mark to what happens to other clubs in this competition at this stage if they made the same mistake we have. Other teams might be involved in a different group dynamic.

[Gambo]

6 minutes ago, The Treasurer said:

 

This is not only unfair to our club and fans, it's also unfair to the other teams in our group. 

This should be dealt with today so that everyone involved knows where they stand within our qualifying group.

 

 

This is something all clubs in our group should be demanding this morning.

Only fair to all clubs and all fans.

[obua]

7 minutes ago, The Treasurer said:

I gave up reading through this thread on page 2 so all this may have been covered in amongst the pant-wetting and hand wringing.

 

First of all the is an embarrassing mistake by the club, no doubt about it and someone will be reprimanded (or worse) for this, and rightly so.

However lets look at the facts.

The player in question was already registered as a Hearts player, we only failed to amend his contract details with the authorities.

It's wrong, but we were hardly trying to play Ronaldo under a false name.

People are using the Albion Rovers case to say we'll get thrown out the cup but they fail to realise that was a different competition.

As similar situation has arisen in this competition before, ironically with Cove Rangers being the guilty party. They were given a fine, nothing else.

What does annoy me is that they are waiting until next week to decide what punishment we will be handed.

This is not only unfair to our club and fans, it's also unfair to the other teams in our group. 

This should be dealt with today so that everyone involved knows where they stand within our qualifying group.

 

 

Well said.

[heartsfc_fan]

7 minutes ago, The Treasurer said:

I gave up reading through this thread on page 2 so all this may have been covered in amongst the pant-wetting and hand wringing.

 

First of all the is an embarrassing mistake by the club, no doubt about it and someone will be reprimanded (or worse) for this, and rightly so.

However lets look at the facts.

The player in question was already registered as a Hearts player, we only failed to amend his contract details with the authorities.

It's wrong, but we were hardly trying to play Ronaldo under a false name.

People are using the Albion Rovers case to say we'll get thrown out the cup but they fail to realise that was a different competition.

As similar situation has arisen in this competition before, ironically with Cove Rangers being the guilty party. They were given a fine, nothing else.

What does annoy me is that they are waiting until next week to decide what punishment we will be handed.

This is not only unfair to our club and fans, it's also unfair to the other teams in our group. 

This should be dealt with today so that everyone involved knows where they stand within our qualifying group.

 

 

This.

Why they are waiting until Monday to decide, it's bizarre.

 

I fully expect a fine and Cove awarded the he 3-0. We won't be chucked out the competition

 

[glynnlondon]

Wonder what this felly would have made of it

 

 

[John Findlay]

4 minutes ago, glynnlondon said:

Wonder what this felly would have made of it

 

 

How can this help Sevco?

[Bellion]

21 minutes ago, The Treasurer said:

I gave up reading through this thread on page 2 so all this may have been covered in amongst the pant-wetting and hand wringing.

 

First of all the is an embarrassing mistake by the club, no doubt about it and someone will be reprimanded (or worse) for this, and rightly so.

However lets look at the facts.

The player in question was already registered as a Hearts player, we only failed to amend his contract details with the authorities.

It's wrong, but we were hardly trying to play Ronaldo under a false name.

People are using the Albion Rovers case to say we'll get thrown out the cup but they fail to realise that was a different competition.

As similar situation has arisen in this competition before, ironically with Cove Rangers being the guilty party. They were given a fine, nothing else.

What does annoy me is that they are waiting until next week to decide what punishment we will be handed.

This is not only unfair to our club and fans, it's also unfair to the other teams in our group. 

This should be dealt with today so that everyone involved knows where they stand within our qualifying group.

 

 

Cove’s player was an unused substitute, so it’s not the same situation. 

 

As before:

 

play suspended player = replay

play unregistered player = forfeit the game

list either of the above as an unused sub = fine as no sporting advantage gained

[Rudy T]

28 minutes ago, kingantti1874 said:

 

No different to how they would deal with this in the league. I doubt cove even with 3 points will be qualifying 

 

Its irrelevant how cove perform or are likely to perform. We broke the rules, and Cove receiving 3 points and us remaining in the competition will isn't fair on the other teams who still have to play us. I suspect we will get away with a fine but we certainly couldn't complain if they kicked us out. I'm pretty sure Raith and Cowdenbeath would have plenty to say if Cove get 3 points and we remain in the group.   

[Tommy Brown]

6 minutes ago, glynnlondon said:

Wonder what this felly would have made of it

 

 

I'll leave this in my in-tray until Monday.

[Tommy Brown]

1 hour ago, Skacelsid said:

A bit embarrassing for AB, the effect the player had or did not have on the game will be seen as irrelevant to the decision on punishment, we have made an error and held our hands up, I suspect a fine and a wrist slap. A points deduction would be harsh but possible, whatever it be, take it on the chin, learn a lesson and move on.

Yip

[DETTY29]

3 minutes ago, Rudy T said:

 

Its irrelevant how cove perform or are likely to perform. We broke the rules, and Cove receiving 3 points and us remaining in the competition will isn't fair on the other teams who still have to play us. I suspect we will get away with a fine but we certainly couldn't complain if they kicked us out. I'm pretty sure Raith and Cowdenbeath would have plenty to say if Cove get 3 points and we remain in the group.   

Can't see how we could get kicked out  if what is essentially a group / league unless of course our Cove match is declared null and void.

[Francis Albert]

9 hours ago, luckyBatistuta said:

 

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? 

Not guaranteed but on the basis that we would be expected to beat Cove in a replay  by more than one goal (reports and the stats suggest four or five would have been a better reflection of play on Wednesday) very likely.

And yes, I think it would be best for the others in the group (assuming Hearts are not thrown out) for Cove to be given a 3-0 win ... they would all be delighted to see by far the strongest team in the group (on paper at least) defeated by the weakest.

[wavydavy]

38 minutes ago, davidjambo51 said:

There would be an almighty uproar if the authorities throw us out of the Competition next week.

They should advise THIS week , to let the fans know the Raith game is meaningless ( or not ).

 

There is also the loss of revenue for the teams we woukd still have to play. Hardly fair on them as lots of these clubs look forward to playing well supported teams like us to help their cahflow.

[DETTY29]

Anyway.  Far too many scenarios at play.

 

We should insist on being able to continue to play and let CAS decide.

 

A process that might take 2 years.

[Bellion]

6 minutes ago, Rudy T said:

 

Its irrelevant how cove perform or are likely to perform. We broke the rules, and Cove receiving 3 points and us remaining in the competition will isn't fair on the other teams who still have to play us. I suspect we will get away with a fine but we certainly couldn't complain if they kicked us out. I'm pretty sure Raith and Cowdenbeath would have plenty to say if Cove get 3 points and we remain in the group.   

There is no basis for kicking us out of the competition. If we do this on 4 August, Hamilton will be awarded a 3-0 walkover. We won’t be kicked out of the league. Hamilton’s rivals might see it as unfair that they get 3 points for free, but that’s the way it goes.

[tokyowalnut]

We've made an embarrassing error, but it's also typical of the authorities to take an age to make a decision. Surely in this instance the club should immediately know the sanctions we are facing.

 

The administration of Scottish football is a joke, which has be shown time and time again in recent times. 

 

A fine should be enough.

[part_time_jambo]

18 pages of "they'll throw us out, no they won't.  They'll fine us, no they won't." etc. I think everyone has said everything that can be said about this. Why don't we do some gardening or something now and wait to see what is actually done?

[Jammy T]

If there was any risk of us being emptied the hearing would have been before the weekend.

[doctor jambo]

9 minutes ago, Barack said:

Think people are just glossing over the rules, as set out in precedent, for their own amusement now.

 

 

 

 

The rules, as applied, with the  precedent set by Rangers for fielding ineligible players is.................no punishment.

Or at least with regard to improper registration

[Deevers]

1 minute ago, doctor jambo said:

The rules, as applied, with the  precedent set by Rangers for fielding ineligible players is.................no punishment.

Or at least with regard to improper registration

Or as far as Rangers were concerned "Imperfectly Registered".  Seems to cover our situation.  

[doctor jambo]

Just now, Deevers said:

Or as far as Rangers were concerned "Imperfectly Registered".  Seems to cover our situation.  

Indeed,

the punishment for not correctly filing the paper work has been utterly wiped out, and such an offence gives no unfair sporting advantage.

So there should be no punishment

 

Or we simply transfer the ownership to FOH, and leave the fine to Budge as the previous company owner, so not our problem

[Nookie Bear]

1 hour ago, Sir Vladimir of Romanov said:

15 point deduction, player signing ban is what I heard. 

 

Maybe we can get an agreement to not actually punish us as it was the old Hearts lfault?

 

Imagine this had happened under your User Name's reign.

 

4000 Faceless Liffs playing for us, but at least they were registered

 

[INNERLEITHEN HMFC 1874]

We messed up here end of story and i expect the result to be over turned.No excuses on our part it was a school boy error.

Just have to win the other 3 games,which we will do no bother.

[glynnlondon]

16 minutes ago, part_time_jambo said:

18 pages of "they'll throw us out, no they won't.  They'll fine us, no they won't." etc. I think everyone has said everything that can be said about this. Why don't we do some gardening or something now and wait to see what is actually done?

Where's the fun in that ?

[Deevers]

5 minutes ago, Barack said:

Well, that's another kettle of sharks altogether.

 

We're not getting kicked out. However much some want to labour the point for a bite.

Exactly so.

 

if this thread has been good for anything it's hilighted the hysteria merchants, and those interlopers on here who love to bathe in anything negative they can find about the club and Maliciously wish us the very worst out comes. 

 

Previous breaches of this rule have been dealt with by a fine and I would hope that given the circumstances being that the paperwork being correctly completed that an oversight in uploading the details onto the SFA site shows this to be a technical breach with no attempt to deceive or gain any advantage.  Tuesday should be interesting though.

[Midloth_Iain]

gonna predict a £5k fine and a censure

[luckydug]

9 hours 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. 

Very unfair !

Victorian is a good poster who is merely having a go at the usual suspects who launch into every negative point about Hearts with great enthusiasm .

Truth is nobody knows what is going to happen here due to the SPFL being as incompetent as Hearts by not having a rule for such an event unambiguously stated in the competition rules.

A complete **** up all round imo. 

[The Old Tolbooth]

1 hour ago, Geoff Kilpatrick said:

One left field sanction could be a guarantee that we will be unseeded should we qualify.

 

That really would be left field, I can't see it happening though because if they award Cove a 3-0 win, and we end up tanking the rest of the teams in the other 3 games and winning the group, then it would be farcical as we've won the group on merit, albeit it would be a tough ask if Cove are awarded the win as we'd already be 8 goals behind ICT. 

[Midloth_Iain]

1 minute ago, Deevers said:

Exactly so.

 

if this thread has been good for anything it's hilighted the hysteria merchants, and those interlopers on here who love to bathe in anything negative they can find about the club and Maliciously wish us the very worst out comes. 

 

 

 

[Nookie Bear]

7 minutes ago, Deevers said:

if this thread has been good for anything it's hilighted the hysteria merchants, and those interlopers on here who love to bathe in anything negative they can find about the club and Maliciously wish us the very worst out comes. 

 

 

 

In fairness, they don't have difficulty finding stuff.

 

A crap couple of seasons, plus two extraordinary "admin" errors that could potentially cost us a great deal of money, and we are just one game into the new season!

 

On the positive side, we may be better on the pitch this season.

[DETTY29]

Got to admit at my last 3 work locations more and more resourcing; purchasing; timesheet management; planning management; financial management and so on are being used via portals  provided by external 3rd parties.

 

And they all have one thing in common.

 

Bloody useless and not user friendly.

[All Out Attack]

11 minutes ago, Deevers said:

Exactly so.

 

if this thread has been good for anything it's hilighted the hysteria merchants, and those interlopers on here who love to bathe in anything negative they can find about the club and Maliciously wish us the very worst out comes. 

 

 

Right, so the club didn't screw up and no penalties are appropriate. We just imagined the whole thing. Give us a break... 

 

What an absolute shambles. 

 

 

 

Edited July 20, 2018 by All Out Attack

[stuart500]

1 hour ago, Gambo said:

That would make any decision wrong.

It should have zero to do with how a team are doing or even who the team is.

 

What happens to Hearts will be a bench mark to what happens to other clubs in this competition at this stage if they made the same mistake we have. Other teams might be involved in a different group dynamic.

I would think the punishment for Hearts can only be based upon the competition rules as they stood when the game was played. These allow more or less an ad hoc solution within the possible sanctions. 

Any new set of rules with prescribed punishments would need to apply from next season. 

[Victorian]

It could be the superfly TNT guns of the Navarone, go medieval on our ass with a pair of pliers and a blowtorch option.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

They could make us take back Conor Sammon.

 

[Phage]

Can we not just call it an 'imperfect' registration with no sporting advantage... and then do it for the next 10 years?

[Nookie Bear]

1 minute ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

Or you could look at all the positives - 3 more years sponsorship, new pitch, lots of very positive statements by new players about the club and how well things are done etc etc.  

 

 

So...playing devil's advocate here...what every other club does then?

[Beast Boy]

It’s a total **** up, there’s no getting away from that fact. Really annoying. However it’s almost impossible to discuss it properly due to the previous OTT hyperbole over little things. Shame really.

[Heartsofgold]

2 minutes ago, Victorian said:

It could be the superfly TNT guns of the Navarone, go medieval on our ass with a pair of pliers and a blowtorch option.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

They could make us take back Conor Sammon.

 

 

Come on!!  Even the SPFL is not that cruel.

[kila]

9 hours ago, true-jambo said:

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

 

This sort of shit has been happening for years since Budge took over.

 

https://twitter.com/jamtarts/status/553919380166574080

 

Another example of the club back in 2015 failing in due diligence by getting a player's name wrong on the official team sheet!

[lou]

7 hours ago, Blackford Hearts said:

It's pretty straightforward and I think the same for all players registered with SFA regardless of age. Sign the player, upload their details to their website and send in the paperwork registered mail. Hardly complicated

I haven't registered players or teams in a few years but it was more complex at the time and I also felt that if there had been a clear and obvious error, they were very unhelpful and were quite happy to let a team or individuals miss out on playing rather than help, bearing in mind the vast majority of people using this are volunteers doing it in their own time, only last week I heard someone say how abnoxous and unhelpful one of the staff were

[Escobar PHM]

28 minutes ago, Deevers said:

 

 

Previous breaches of this rule have been dealt with by a fine and I would hope that given the circumstances being that the paperwork being correctly completed that an oversight in uploading the details onto the SFA site shows this to be a technical breach with no attempt to deceive or gain any advantage.  Tuesday should be interesting though.

Most previous breaches of the rule have been dealt with by a fine AND a 3-0 score reversal. The score reversal doesn't really work in this case because it disadvantages other teams in the group.

 

None of the other cases involved any attempt at cheating or deception and all were administrative errors, as is the case here. It made no difference to the punishment. The punishments have been extraordinarily harsh for what amounts to an admin error, but we have to be thinking we're getting the same harsh punishment here.

 

Yes we might get away with just a fine. Doubtful going by most of the past cases but we might. More likely is a punitive points deduction without actually reversing the score of the Cove match, so that we're the only team punished and no one else is unduly disadvantaged. If Cove lose on Saturday, they cant qualify, even with the 3 points reversed so that becomes more likely, as it wouldn't  disadvantage any other team then.

Edited July 20, 2018 by Escobar PHM

[151]

Surely the punishment has to be something that can work both ways as in:

 

What if the team fielding the ineligible player actually lost the game 4-0? Do they change that to a 3-0?

 

What if the team fielding an ineligible player lost 2-0? They clearly gained no advantage so why award another goal?

 

And how do they prove he even made any impact on the scoreline (unless of course the ineligible player bangs in 6)

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

11 minutes ago, Escobar PHM said:

Most previous breaches of the rule have been dealt with by a fine AND a 3-0 score reversal. The score reversal doesn't really work in this case because it disadvantages other teams in the group.

 

None of the other cases involved any attempt at cheating or deception and all were administrative errors, as is the case here. It made no difference to the punishment. The punishments have been extraordinarily harsh for what amounts to an admin error, but we have to be thinking we're getting the same harsh punishment here.

 

Yes we might get away with just a fine. Doubtful going by most of the past cases but we might. More likely is a punitive points deduction without actually reversing the score of the Cove match, so that we're the only team punished and no one else is unduly disadvantaged. If Cove lose on Saturday, they cant qualify, even with the 3 points reversed so that becomes more likely, as it would disadvantage any other team then.

Indeed. How are other teams disadvantaged by a result reversal precisely? There are 3 points on offer for the game. If those go to Cove then no one else's fixture against them is changed nor are any of their fixtures against us.

Edited July 20, 2018 by Geoff Kilpatrick

[Jambojay84]

1 hour ago, Haken said:

I'd be very surprised if there is any onus at all on the blazers to check that things have been done correctly.  This will be 100% the club's responsibility with the database only being used as a means of checking for errors... ...such as the one we've made.

Thanks for the reply mate, someone else told me this as well, I just assumed that stuff like that would be checked on both sides. Just need to hope that we learn from this moving forward, have a good weekend mate ?

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

Just now, Francis Albert said:

One positive is that at least we didn't try to blame the exceptional summer weather this time.

Now come on. A big session in the beer garden and the hangover next day could easily have contributed!

[AlimOzturk]

FFS that's basic shit 

 

Can't defend that. 

[Beast Boy]

1 minute ago, Francis Albert said:

One positive is that at least we didn't try to blame the exceptional summer weather this time.

 

That would be difficult, thanks to the big black raincloud that follows you around casting a shadow of negativity on everything you touch. ?⛈☁️

[Escobar PHM]

6 minutes ago, Geoff Kilpatrick said:

How are other teams disadvantaged by a result reversal precisely? There are 3 points on offer for the game. If those go to Cove then no one else's fixture against them is changed nor are any of their fixtures against us.

They'd be disadvantaged if Cove got into a qualifying position partly because of 3 points they were 'awarded' for a game they lost on the park. Cove wont get into that position but its mathematically still possible.

[Francis Albert]

3 minutes ago, Bez said:

 

That would be difficult, thanks to the big black raincloud that follows you around casting a shadow of negativity on everything you touch. ?⛈☁️

That's what I get for finding a positive in this shambles!

[Bellion]

3 minutes ago, Escobar PHM said:

They'd be disadvantaged if Cove got into a qualifying position partly because of 3 points they were 'awarded' for a game they lost on the park. Cove wont get into that position but its mathematically still possible.

Equally they're advantaged by Hearts losing 3 points and being in a worse position to qualify. It's neutral for the other three. Either way, they control whether they qualify or not. 

Edited July 20, 2018 by Bellion