Originally Posted by accymel (Post 395129)

Nice try MT :rolleyes: im not registering to see it hehehehehehehhehe:D

Originally Posted by mthead (Post 395131)

Sorry didnt know you would have to.Thought it was like on ere were you can read but not post.:o
I've linked them to this thread as well.:)

Originally Posted by accymel (Post 395132)

LOL dont think it allows guests to view :confused: so does that mean there might be a contingent of FC fans invading here :rolleyes: :D lol

Originally Posted by mthead (Post 395135)

Don't know,they are alright decent bunch really.;)

Originally Posted by accymel (Post 395137)

So what is the gist of what they are saying on there as we cant view ??

Originally Posted by Tin Monkey (Post 394803)

OK, I'm ready now....

Is anyone really surprised by what's happened? I was really angry when I first heard about this, but now I feel like it's what I've come to expect.

I said months ago that Stanley is a Football League team, but a Conference North (or lower) club. The way things are run are nothing short of shambolic!! Minimal, inexperienced staff can't be expected to run a professional business, but it's what's been happening for some time now.

When we played Kidderminster at the end of last season I was talking to their ex-secretary. He said that administration in the League was a nightmare and that the paperwork and regulations were 5 times the amount of that in the Conference. He said he had two filing cabinets: one for club stuff and one for League stuff. There was so much of it. He said dealing with the admin side of the League was a full-time job, so what do Stanley do? The club passes the duties of the club secretary around a handful of employees, with a young girl with minimal experience and knowledge being given club secretarial duties (alongside her other work).

Stanley have stumbled blindly along and have now been caught out. In light of the way that other clubs have been punished for breaking similar rules, Stanley should be punished in a similar fashion.

Let's face it, we're not a League club! A League club is a professional business, not an amateur make-do outfit. I feel for the fans. I feel for the players. I feel for the innocents affected by all this. I feel embarrassed, ashamed and let down!!! However, one thing I don't feel is surprised.
Tinpot all the way!

Originally Posted by mthead (Post 395140)

They all seem to be sympathetic apart from one idiot who was going on about the Alty incident,but Kipax put him in his place:D

Originally Posted by mr bean (Post 395180)

how must the players feel to have caused this ???

Originally Posted by mr bean (Post 395180)

how must the players feel to have caused this ???

Originally Posted by Oggy (Post 395209)

Can't understand why the club haven't declared the other game involved, at least we'd know the scale of any deduction. 4,5 or 7? :(

Originally Posted by BuryDave (Post 395206)

feel sorry for you guys. being a shaker i obviously know a little about how this feels as it happened to us in the cup, and as much as it would make us feel a little bit safer it's no way for a team to go down should that happen.

At the end of the day we're both similar sized clubs and could do with the revenue from the derby games rather than getting nowt for tuesday night rearranged games against the likes of Torquay and Boston.

just hope this doesn't cost you more than the points.

Originally Posted by Haggis316 (Post 395361)

Presumably they mean (a) (v) and that by "in accordance" they mean that the written permission was copied to the relevant people at the appropriate time.

I recall that at the time Preston's website signified their approbation of the move.

Originally Posted by Outback Ozzy (Post 395460)

3. (a) Trainees

(v) A registered Trainee may play for another Club subject to the written approval of the Club for which the Trainee is registered. A copy of the written permission must be received by The Association, the league or combination of which the Club is a member, the Trainee and the Club for which the Trainee is to play. A Club may not play more than two such Trainees in any match at first team level. (source www.thefa.com)

For those who aren't in the know, there is no rule C3 (b) (v) but the above is Rule C3 (a) (v).
However, if PNE are referring to the scholarship section, then the above section (v) still applies except change the words registered trainee for any player who is registered for a scholarship. Further bits where it refers to a trainee is changed to player. Any more thoughts?

Perhaps the FA are saying they never got the relevant paperwork from PNE

Originally Posted by Whalley Red (Post 395496)

"A copy of the written permission ..." presumably means that it was Stanley's responsibility to forward the written permission to the FA, not PNE's ... as in the Bury case.

Originally Posted by maccawozzagod (Post 395995)

right, it really annoys me that they aren't saying anything..... I am assuming now that we are goosed and going down regardless because the team are playing kack and we are going to lose some points.

If they told us what we are facing then at least we could all start doing the maths and working out how we claw back a ten point deficit or whatever. The only thing I can think of is that it is a massive amount of points and if they publicise that then the crowds wont come because they know we are doomed.

Absolute crap, let us know and then we can stare adversity in the face and sing em home anyway! If they know, and they must, then they should tell us. They tell the fans absolutely nowt here and it stinks.

Originally Posted by K.S.H (Post 394757)

Can we not blame Preston for releasing him to us, surely a team of their stature should have known :rolleyes:

Originally Posted by Lancashire Stan (Post 396140)

If you look at the smiley timpalty you will see this was a sarcastic comment.
It was a swipe at the pathetic excuses by the idiots last year.

Originally Posted by timpalty (Post 396115)

Couldn't have happened to a nicer bunch!

Originally Posted by maccawozzagod (Post 396243)

TIMPALTY is this a wrongly spelt pseudonym for TINPOT ALTY?

At least we've been there you numpty! We may be back at your backwater suburban palace next season if you can stay in the Conference long enough. If not, shame, would have looked forward to rubbing your noses in the dirt once again.

Originally Posted by timpalty (Post 396115)

Suddenly the team who owned the player are to blame..?!? Thats a dramatic change from this time last season.....!!!

Originally Posted by maccawozzagod (Post 395993)

fa.com suspensions list http://www.thefa.com/TheFA/Disciplin...dedPlayers.htm
has Andrew Proctor still listed to serve 3 games for his sending off against Darlington in August he missed the Barnet home game, the Stockport away game then the Forest game in the cup. He was then an unused sub against Rochdale at home which we drew 1-1. Do Carling Cup games count? If not then we would lose the point gained in this match.

Originally Posted by maccawozzagod (Post 396243)

TIMPALTY is this a wrongly spelt pseudonym for TINPOT ALTY?

Originally Posted by maccawozzagod (Post 396976)

thats rich coming from an Altringham fan.

Originally Posted by timpalty

Quote:
Originally Posted by maccawozzagod
TIMPALTY is this a wrongly spelt pseudonym for TINPOT ALTY?


Haha!! Inbreds still not learnt to read!??! It would have to have been TiNpalty for it to be a pseudonym of tinpot alty. Are you the club secretary, you seem to be about as able with literature??

Originally Posted by timpalty (Post 396975)

Haha!! Inbreds still not learnt to read!??! It would have to have been TiNpalty for it to be a pseudonym of tinpot alty. Are you the club secretary, you seem to be about as able with literature??

Originally Posted by Oggy (Post 396990)

errrm that's Altrincham, Macca :o

Unless you're winding him up, in which case Altringham is fine :)

(You wouldn't wind an Alty fan up, surely) :rolleyes:

Originally Posted by timpalty (Post 396975)

Haha!! Inbreds still not learnt to read!??! It would have to have been TiNpalty for it to be a pseudonym of tinpot alty. Are you the club secretary, you seem to be about as able with literature??

Originally Posted by MCR ADIM (Post 397953)

if you buy the observer today there is a write up on front page saying stanley could lose SEVEN points it goes on to say the first playing being chris mcgrail who cam on as a sub in 3-2 over mansfield town and the 1-1 draw with wycombe wanderers and the second is local teenage goalkeeper martin fearon

Originally Posted by ukcowboy (Post 397958)

is , IMHO, an absolute farce.

:mad:

Originally Posted by maccawozzagod (Post 397962)

technically it's a technicality :D

Originally Posted by Outback Ozzy (Post 397994)

Surely Martin Fearon has already signed on the dotted line as a first team player, albeit in reserve (so to speak). I was under the impression he was signed on last season, so surely his registration carries over to this one. The other point is, he hasn't played only warmed the bench!!!

Originally Posted by Redash (Post 398009)

This might explain why he hasn't been on the bench for the last 2 games.

Originally Posted by MCR ADIM (Post 397953)

if you buy the observer today there is a write up on front page saying stanley could lose SEVEN points it goes on to say the first playing being chris mcgrail who cam on as a sub in 3-2 over mansfield town and the 1-1 draw with wycombe wanderers and the second is local teenage goalkeeper martin fearon

Originally Posted by MCR ADIM (Post 397953)

if you buy the observer today there is a write up on front page saying stanley could lose SEVEN points it goes on to say the first playing being chris mcgrail who cam on as a sub in 3-2 over mansfield town and the 1-1 draw with wycombe wanderers and the second is local teenage goalkeeper martin fearon

Originally Posted by Oggy (Post 398035)

(Being on the bench qualifies for loss of points, as far as I understand)

Originally Posted by harwood red (Post 398054)

If it is fearo, then I hope for the lads sake that there isn't any silly chanting to the fact on saturday. Cos although its in no way his fault he is bound to feel pretty bad about it.

so please don't be having a go at him from the terraces on saturday!!!!!!!!!! :(

Originally Posted by Bagpuss (Post 398107)

It was just a thought but I will join in if the chant Whalley out is sung.

Originally Posted by yerself (Post 394681)

Just been on Radio Lancashire that the club are under investigation for fielding an ineligible player. Apparently Chris McGrail was only on a scholar's contract at Preston and was, therefore, not allowed to play in any first team Football League games. If found guilty we could be docked four points.

Originally Posted by hereford till i die (Post 399744)

4 points +3points = 7 = relegation.

Originally Posted by hereford till i die (Post 399744)

4 points +3points = 7 = relegation.

Originally Posted by hereford till i die (Post 400132)

Stanley Under Investigation, for being a tin pot sunday league side.

Originally Posted by mthead (Post 399768)

Every post you've made is absolute dribble.Is there anyone in Hereford with a brain?Everyone likes banter but stuff that hits below the belt is not on.Go and join your like at Elland Rd.

Originally Posted by nadsw2002 (Post 399773)

+ 3 on Saturday :D

Originally Posted by suzster (Post 399822)

The article is in the Telegraph newspaper as well about the seven points :(

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/mai...9/sfgacc19.xml

I just hope the 'powers that be' see sense and don't condemn Stanley to almost certain relegation.

Suz x.

Originally Posted by AccyMad (Post 400163)

To say you don't seem to like us you're on here an awful lot, have you nowt better to do?

Originally Posted by hereford till i die (Post 400236)

you got away with it in the conference, when altrincham took all the blame for a similar situation, perhaps time has caught up with you.

Originally Posted by hereford till i die (Post 400236)

i hope they do see sense and take the points of accy, you got away with it in the conference, when altrincham took all the blame for a similar situation, perhaps time has caught up with you.

Originally Posted by hereford till i die (Post 400233)

yes i have a brain, and if your little inbred poster ksh had not come on our forum stirring things up i would not be on here, so blame IT for the situation.

Originally Posted by hereford till i die (Post 400132)

hereford till i die

Originally Posted by Jesus_was_A_red_ (Post 401787)

Observer states Stanley will know outcome a week today regarding points deducted IF that is to be the outcome.

Originally Posted by stanleyfan (Post 402898)

teams in the past have started the new season on minus points, if we are going to have points deducted then thats better than now! Hope it goes well. Can you be deducted points for having someone on the bench who didnt come on and affect play? (Martin fearon)

Originally Posted by Haggis316 (Post 403110)

If Leeds were fined just £2000 for having an ineligible unfielded goalie on the bench why should Stanley get more than a fine for it scaled down to reflect the fact that they are a much smaller club?

As I see it the three points at Wrexham should be unimpeachable.

Originally Posted by K.S.H (Post 402895)

Heard a good whisper today about this enquiry from a good scource, things are looking a little better then I expected, have to keep my gob shut though

Originally Posted by Jimbo T Hornblower (Post 403115)

As has been publicly said before KSH, Stanley have put a strong case for the hearing on the 30th but cannot say anything. You know it, I know it - just wish scaremongerers on here and the press could know it. You'll all find out on the 30th just how much of a technicality this thing is Im sure.... Jimbo T :horn8:blower