jamboinglasgow Posted July 13, 2021 Share Posted July 13, 2021 After that last round of fixtures which saw Forfar getting awarded a 3-0 win over Ross County, St Mirren awarded a 3-0 win over Dumbarton and Stranraer a 3-0 win over Greenock Morton, all for Covid. Kilmarnock are the latest to get in trouble. The SPFL are having a disciplinary meeting on Thursday to determine if they fielded a player who was meant to serve a 1 match suspension (Daniel Armstrong.) They beat East Kilbride 2-0 in that fixture. You wonder if it will be another 3-0 win awarded. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Posted July 13, 2021 Share Posted July 13, 2021 Did we not field an ineligible player and got a 2-0 loss? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Loblaw Posted July 13, 2021 Share Posted July 13, 2021 3 minutes ago, Jeff said: Did we not field an ineligible player and got a 2-0 loss? We won, against Cove and I think we brought Irving on who was ineligible. We were docked 2 points and fined £10k if I remember rightly. The 1 point we got to keep seen us still qualify. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff Posted July 13, 2021 Share Posted July 13, 2021 Just now, Bob Loblaw said: We won, against Cove and I think we brought Irving on who was ineligible. We were docked 2 points and fined £10k if I remember rightly. The 1 point we got to keep seen us still qualify. Ah yeah that's right. I knew the number 2 came into it somewhere. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamboinglasgow Posted July 13, 2021 Author Share Posted July 13, 2021 6 minutes ago, Jeff said: Ah yeah that's right. I knew the number 2 came into it somewhere. Yeah, I think the issue was Irving was not registered properly after he came back from his loan deal from the previous season. Will be interesting to see if playing a player who is suspended is seen as equal to that or worse. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
happyjam Posted July 13, 2021 Share Posted July 13, 2021 6 minutes ago, jamboinglasgow said: Yeah, I think the issue was Irving was not registered properly after he came back from his loan deal from the previous season. Will be interesting to see if playing a player who is suspended is seen as equal to that or worse. Just a hunch but I think fielding a suspended player will be treated as a greater offence and would expect a 3-0 win for East Kilbride. More importantly have they made any decision on what happens to SPFL games this season if a team is unable to complete a fixture. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Jambo Posted July 13, 2021 Share Posted July 13, 2021 6 minutes ago, jamboinglasgow said: Yeah, I think the issue was Irving was not registered properly after he came back from his loan deal from the previous season. Will be interesting to see if playing a player who is suspended is seen as equal to that or worse. I think it will be seen as worse. Irving could have been eligible if the paper work had been completed correctly. Whereas, a suspended player absolutely shouldn't have been playing. That said, I think the Hearts punishment opened up a can of worms. I can see why Kilmarnock fans would feel aggrieved if they get a 3-0 loss. I can also understand why Cove felt aggrieved that we were punished but they didn't get the direct benefit. The games forfeited for covid are potentially going to make a bit of a mockery of the group stages. Goal difference doesn't just matter within groups but potentially between groups to decide which group winners are seeded and which second place teams go through. I think I'm right in saying 3 of the 5 highest scoring wins were games that were forfeited. Over the course of a whole league season, awarding a 3-0 win is unlikely to make much odds to goal difference, but over the course of a 4 game group stage it feels excessive reward for the team benefitting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Jambo Posted July 13, 2021 Share Posted July 13, 2021 4 minutes ago, happyjam said: Just a hunch but I think fielding a suspended player will be treated as a greater offence and would expect a 3-0 win for East Kilbride. More importantly have they made any decision on what happens to SPFL games this season if a team is unable to complete a fixture. I agree. Having just looked at the details, the only things that might go in his favour are that the player had joined from Raith this summer which is presumably why they missed it. He also only played the final 18minutes when they were already 2-0 up. But agree, 3-0 still feels the most likely outcome. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamboGraham Posted July 13, 2021 Share Posted July 13, 2021 8 minutes ago, happyjam said: More importantly have they made any decision on what happens to SPFL games this season if a team is unable to complete a fixture. Surely they will wait to see which team it is first.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jambof3tornado Posted July 13, 2021 Share Posted July 13, 2021 15 minutes ago, Saint Jambo said: I agree. Having just looked at the details, the only things that might go in his favour are that the player had joined from Raith this summer which is presumably why they missed it. He also only played the final 18minutes when they were already 2-0 up. But agree, 3-0 still feels the most likely outcome. Do they look for mitigating circumstances though? How long he played in the match etc isnt overly relevant I'd have said. Starts muddying the waters more if clubs can argue how much influence a player that shouldn't have been on the pitch had in a match. Seems a shambles in this day and age and I said the same over our misdemeanour too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Jambo Posted July 13, 2021 Share Posted July 13, 2021 9 minutes ago, Jambof3tornado said: Do they look for mitigating circumstances though? How long he played in the match etc isnt overly relevant I'd have said. Starts muddying the waters more if clubs can argue how much influence a player that shouldn't have been on the pitch had in a match. Seems a shambles in this day and age and I said the same over our misdemeanour too. You wouldn't have thought so, but they did in our case. They didn't just say we had fielded an ineligible player so it was a 3-0 defeat, they took into account other factors. Its why for all I was pleased with the decision benefitting us, I think it was the wrong decision. The SPFL have been inconsistent in the past. Albion Rovers were kicked out the challenge cup for fielding a player who wasn't registered with them (but like Andrew Irving could have been), while Livingston were allowed to replay a challenge cup game after they fielded a player who was suspended. The fact there isn't a clear set of punishments set out for this kind of offence is ridiculous, but you can see how muddy the waters already are. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu_HMFC Posted July 13, 2021 Share Posted July 13, 2021 1 hour ago, Jeff said: Did we not field an ineligible player and got a 2-0 loss? Was it not Andy Irving ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colinmaroon Posted July 13, 2021 Share Posted July 13, 2021 1 hour ago, Saint Jambo said: I think it will be seen as worse. Irving could have been eligible if the paper work had been completed correctly. Whereas, a suspended player absolutely shouldn't have been playing. That said, I think the Hearts punishment opened up a can of worms. I can see why Kilmarnock fans would feel aggrieved if they get a 3-0 loss. I can also understand why Cove felt aggrieved that we were punished but they didn't get the direct benefit. The games forfeited for covid are potentially going to make a bit of a mockery of the group stages. Goal difference doesn't just matter within groups but potentially between groups to decide which group winners are seeded and which second place teams go through. I think I'm right in saying 3 of the 5 highest scoring wins were games that were forfeited. Over the course of a whole league season, awarding a 3-0 win is unlikely to make much odds to goal difference, but over the course of a 4 game group stage it feels excessive reward for the team benefitting. Just another example of the SPFL/SFA inability to think beyond the sheet of paper in front of their eyes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JTJ Posted July 13, 2021 Share Posted July 13, 2021 50 minutes ago, Saint Jambo said: You wouldn't have thought so, but they did in our case. They didn't just say we had fielded an ineligible player so it was a 3-0 defeat, they took into account other factors. Its why for all I was pleased with the decision benefitting us, I think it was the wrong decision. The SPFL have been inconsistent in the past. Albion Rovers were kicked out the challenge cup for fielding a player who wasn't registered with them (but like Andrew Irving could have been), while Livingston were allowed to replay a challenge cup game after they fielded a player who was suspended. The fact there isn't a clear set of punishments set out for this kind of offence is ridiculous, but you can see how muddy the waters already are. It does matter which team it is, sadly. I remember Rangers being told international clearance was not through for a player but they just went ahead and played him anyway. That was no mistake just total arrogance. They won 3-0 and the Scottish league slapped their wrist with a small fine. I think it was a goalkeeper who played the full game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Niemi’s gloves Posted July 13, 2021 Share Posted July 13, 2021 Surprised that nobody has mentioned the influence of TV. In our case, a decision to turn the Cove result into a 3-0 loss would have screwed up the significance of our final group game against ICT which was set to be televised (can’t remember if it was BT or Sky). So magically it became only a 2 point deduction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
martoon Posted July 13, 2021 Share Posted July 13, 2021 19 minutes ago, Niemi’s gloves said: Surprised that nobody has mentioned the influence of TV. In our case, a decision to turn the Cove result into a 3-0 loss would have screwed up the significance of our final group game against ICT which was set to be televised (can’t remember if it was BT or Sky). So magically it became only a 2 point deduction. Made the Hibsnut squeal like a stuck pig which was a nice bonus. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Treasurer Posted July 13, 2021 Share Posted July 13, 2021 3 hours ago, happyjam said: Just a hunch but I think fielding a suspended player will be treated as a greater offence and would expect a 3-0 win for East Kilbride. More importantly have they made any decision on what happens to SPFL games this season if a team is unable to complete a fixture. Both were admin errors but Irvine was clear to play if the paperwork was completed, the Killie player was not eligible. Teams have been thrown out of competitions for that. As for your second point the league will be shitting it to punish teams in the league just in case one of the uglies was affected Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CJGJ Posted July 13, 2021 Share Posted July 13, 2021 For us it was a failure in getting a new contract registered for an existing player that led to the 2 point penalty Had it been a new signing 3 points would have been a certainty and I suspect Kilmarnock will suffer that fate............unless of course they did checks with the authorities pre match and were told there were no bans in place............I mean it's not like the authorities to get things wrong !! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CJGJ Posted July 13, 2021 Share Posted July 13, 2021 Do we know if the majority of players have received their first dose of the vaccination ? As we have already seen even limited protection might well save fixtures from cancellation and come September most may have received their second dose which will mean a cancellation is even more unlikely Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CJGJ Posted July 13, 2021 Share Posted July 13, 2021 (edited) Here's a scenario for you East Kilbride may well get 3 points due to Kilmarnock fielding an ineligible player They may also get 3 points due to Morton not being able to fulfil tonight's fixture which even if it goes ahead will be behind closed doors,,,,,,,with only a few hours to kick off it has still not been decided whether it will be played So they could have 6 points with a possible plus 6 goal difference and only 2 matches to play in the group Edited July 13, 2021 by CJGJ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hungry hippo Posted July 13, 2021 Share Posted July 13, 2021 1 hour ago, CJGJ said: Do we know if the majority of players have received their first dose of the vaccination ? As we have already seen even limited protection might well save fixtures from cancellation and come September most may have received their second dose which will mean a cancellation is even more unlikely They should have as in Scotland 65.9% of 18-29 year olds have had their first dose and 79.9% of those in their 30s. So even based on standard population around 7 out of 10 of our first team squad will have had it. I'd also hope we are being proactive in encouraging players to get their vaccination so our figure might actually be higher. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Beni of Gorgie Posted July 13, 2021 Share Posted July 13, 2021 1 hour ago, CJGJ said: Here's a scenario for you East Kilbride may well get 3 points due to Kilmarnock fielding an ineligible player They may also get 3 points due to Morton not being able to fulfil tonight's fixture which even if it goes ahead will be behind closed doors,,,,,,,with only a few hours to kick off it has still not been decided whether it will be played So they could have 6 points with a possible plus 6 goal difference and only 2 matches to play in the group Not a good look for the competition. Reckon we have set a precedent for Killie though, not sure they will be hit with the 3-0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sherbet Posted July 13, 2021 Share Posted July 13, 2021 3 hours ago, JTJ said: It does matter which team it is, sadly. I remember Rangers being told international clearance was not through for a player but they just went ahead and played him anyway. That was no mistake just total arrogance. They won 3-0 and the Scottish league slapped their wrist with a small fine. I think it was a goalkeeper who played the full game. Cohen Israeli Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newton51 Posted July 13, 2021 Share Posted July 13, 2021 (edited) 5 hours ago, Stu_HMFC said: Was it not Andy Irving ? It was but felt they did us a favour as only docked 2 points knowing if we won last game then still qualified Edited July 13, 2021 by Newton51 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JTJ Posted July 13, 2021 Share Posted July 13, 2021 36 minutes ago, Sherbet said: Cohen Israeli That's right! It was 3-0 v Stenhousemuir who should have been awarded a wlakover as Rangers knew he was not cleared to play 😁 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sherbet Posted July 13, 2021 Share Posted July 13, 2021 30 minutes ago, JTJ said: That's right! It was 3-0 v Stenhousemuir who should have been awarded a wlakover as Rangers knew he was not cleared to play 😁 If I remember correctly Forfar did the same thing and were disqualified Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.