It is currently Fri Oct 31, 2014 12:50 pm Advanced search

Football Association : Murdoch's puppy : NOT

Unofficial message board for all things QPR - Queens Park Rangers FC.

Re: Football Association : Murdoch's puppy

Postby johnnylate » Sat Apr 30, 2011 9:59 am

Morning chaps,
I woke up to this allover the news this morning. so i googled around and found this post on some piddling site, now i don't know whether it has credence or not, but it does present how bad it could be and i think there is a case to suggest that the club are basing a lot of their confidence on the FA being weak.

here is the link http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/football/championship/2010-2011/watford-queens-park-rangers-382082.html

QPR Points Deduction

It seems­ to me that the whole QPR points deduction scenario is­ one coloured by uncertainty about what the implications­ would if a points deduction were imposed and to that­ end, depending on which camp you're in, whether­ you're an optimist or pessimist, or whether you are­ prone to clutching at straws will determine how you­ view the scenario.

Most people, I think sensibly, have­ adopted the bury the head in the sand philosophy and­ will wait and see with everyone committing to­ "getting as many points as we can".

Before­ our game with QPR on Saturday the BBC were reporting­ that they "understood" that QPR will­ ultimately be fined and not face a points deduction,­ and indeed the QPR spin machine has been engaging in a­ full on assault since the charges were brought to push­ the message that they would not be getting a points­ deduction.

I must confess to have only taking a­ passing interest in the QPR story when it broke in­ March, but as we reach the climax of the season my­ interest was piqued and I have spent several hours­ researching the allegations, reading the FA website,­ reading news reports and reading blog reports of­ several fan websites including our own, QPR's and­ Crystal Palace's who's fans have taken great­ interest in the plight of their local rivals,­ particularly after their own points deduction last­ season.

My conclusions should give QPR fans real­ concern and should only lead to one possible outcome,­ and are as follows:

1. The charges faced by QPR are extremely serious and­ are fundamentally two-fold. That they broke third party­ player ownership rules that were clearly established­ and made clear to all clubs after the Tevez affair, and­ that (in my view more seriously) they then attempted to­ cover up this breach in October 2010 by submitting­ falsified documents to the FA.
2. Alot of people­ compare the QPR situation to West Ham's with Tevez,­ however when charged West Ham held their hands up­ immediately and many feel this helped them avoid a­ points deduction, plus there was never any real­ suggestion of attempted fraud, ultimately it was found­ that they had broken the rules but, lets say, they had­ perhaps been naive of the rules. QPR on the other hand­ have refuted the claims the FA have brought (which as­ we have seen with Rooney recently doesn't go down­ well with the FA), and we have the added issue of an­ attempted fraud.
3. This fraud element moves this (in­ my view) into a very different scenario and one which­ people haven't suggested as a comparison, but here­ goes 1990 Swindon Town. If you're not old enough to­ remember Swindon won promotion from what became the­ Championship to what would become the Premier League­ via the play-offs but were found guilty of making­ illegal payments to players and a few weeks later were­ relegated two divisions by the FA this was later­ reduced to a one division relegation and they found­ themselves back in the Championship.
4. It is this­ precedent that I feel will mean that QPR will face a­ points deduction at least.
. Many people have said that the FA have screwed up by­ delaying the decision until the last week of the­ season, I think this is entirely deliberate and is­ ultimately the right way to have handled this -­ consider the Swindon example from 1990. The charges­ against Swindon were identified well before the end of­ season playoffs but the FA sensibly allowed the season­ to run its course with all teams trying their best.­ Some might say it was cruel to Swindon fans to let them­ experience promotion however had they lost the playoffs­ presumably they would have been relegated to what­ became League One, instead of back to the Championship­ i.e the faced a one division relegation as their­ penalty regardless of how they finished up. I think the­ FA are using this as a precedent, to give no indication­ of a points deduction so that all teams play to their­ potential without bringing the integrity of this­ Championship season into question. QPR may need to gain­ promotion to the Premier League in order that they are­ relegated back to the Championship and not League One­ as with the Swindon case.
6. Consider if QPR had been­ given a 10 point, 30 point or even a relegation as a­ punishment announced in March. How would this have­ affected their own players approach to remaining­ matches and what impact would that have had on the­ points earned by the teams they later played who could­ have had an unfair advantage playing against a team­ that had psychologically imploded. Far more sensible to­ delay any announcement so that everyone assumes no­ points will be deducted, so the chasing pack give it­ their all and assume that 3rd place misses­ auto-promotion, and 7th place misses the play-offs.­ This would ensure that no one can have any complaints­ of unfair advantage when a decision is made.
7. Also if a relegation is the penalty imposed then if­ this had been announced in March it would have meant­ QPR would have had to gain promotion to the Premier­ League to ensure they stayed in the Championship. This­ would clearly be an intolerable position to put them in­ at that time or indeed for the other clubs so the FA,­ by delaying the decision, have ensured the integrity of­ the season, and also giving a massive hidden clue that­ a points deduction at least is guaranteed. Consider the­ alternative, if it was just a fine then impose it now,­ why wait?
8. Points deductions are imposed for far less­ serious offences. A club going into administration,­ which mostly happens due to mismanagement and not fraud­ guarantees a 10 point deduction. Luton Town were­ deducted 10 points for illegal agent payments and a­ further 20 points for issues around their­ administration status. This effectively relegated them­ out of the Football League! QPR should be looking at a­ minimum 10 point penalty plus an additional penalty for­ attempting to deceive the FA. The treatment of Luton­ Town demonstrates that the FA will impose the rules­ ruthlessly regardless of the implications to the­ punished club. Hereford and Torquay were deducted 3­ points and 1 point respectively for each fielding an­ illegible player in their match on 1st February. This­ was the day after the transfer window closed and­ basically resulted from clerical errors in the form­ filling process of players signed in the last few hours­ of the transfer window. So a @#$% up, not fraud, but­ resulted in points being docked. If QPR don't get a­ points deduction for what they have done then it will­ fly in the face of the precedent set down to all other­ clubs.
9. In summary then I believe QPR will face something­ like a 30 point penalty deduction, as that is the scale­ of the seriousness of the offences, which assuming they­ fill one of the top two slots will equate to a­ relegation. All this talk of legal cases are a smoke­ screen. The FA have QPR bang to rights and determining­ the penalty is all that needs to be agreed. They are­ going to take a very dim view of the attempt to deceive­ them, as they did with Luton Town.
10. A 30 point­ deduction would place QPR out of even the play off mix,­ allowing for the playoffs to proceed unhindered
89:50 un-believable!
User avatar
johnnylate
4000 Post Magnificent Mittal!
 
Posts: 4088
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2005 10:44 am
Location: nottingham

Re: Football Association : Murdoch's puppy

Postby jimjams » Sat Apr 30, 2011 3:31 pm

That's the most depressing read I've ever had. the logic sounds faultless!

One question. Are we definetly guilty? Does anyone here think we have a case? And if not why did we deny the charges?
Father of Hudson, QPRNET's Official 2014/15 Good Luck QPR mascot.

Who made it official? I did.
User avatar
jimjams
Dennis Bailey
 
Posts: 1790
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2005 2:33 pm
Location: France

Re: Football Association : Murdoch's puppy

Postby johnnylate » Sat Apr 30, 2011 3:34 pm

The club have consistanly spun the positive on this, but how much can we trust them? Warnock has always said there is no case, but he couldn't very well say 'jack it in chaps, were buggered' could he!.

It might be bollox, but as you say, it's convincing bollox!
89:50 un-believable!
User avatar
johnnylate
4000 Post Magnificent Mittal!
 
Posts: 4088
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2005 10:44 am
Location: nottingham

Re: Football Association : Murdoch's puppy

Postby jimjams » Sat Apr 30, 2011 4:00 pm

I just prey that the club has some grounds for denying the charges.
Father of Hudson, QPRNET's Official 2014/15 Good Luck QPR mascot.

Who made it official? I did.
User avatar
jimjams
Dennis Bailey
 
Posts: 1790
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2005 2:33 pm
Location: France

Re: Football Association : Murdoch's puppy

Postby surrey chad » Fri May 06, 2011 12:48 pm

Isnt a lot of this article based around a rule that didnt exist when we signed Ali, plus the payments wee made via the FA so where does that leave them, aiding and abbeting?
http://uk.virginmoneygiving.com/chadcoombes It's only a little hill in Africa.
User avatar
surrey chad
Ingham Incredible
 
Posts: 3324
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2005 8:56 pm
Location: Fetcham

Re: Football Association : Murdoch's puppy : NOT

Postby minxymartin » Sat May 07, 2011 10:59 pm

Well done Independent Commission
In Warnock We Trusted
User avatar
minxymartin
Holloway Hero
 
Posts: 3611
Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2010 12:38 pm
Location: Oxford

Previous

Return to R's Chat

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], thompsonridd and 3 guests