Stanley Under Investigation - Page 5

Bagpuss · 08-03-2007, 20:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by roxyB

I am sure the club know what they're doing

This is clearly not the case regarding umpteen matters, Eric Whalley it's time to go and take that door slamming son with you.

fettler · 08-03-2007, 20:40

So, I've read all the post regarding the shambles that proports to be a football club, but I am more than a bit unhappy with the cheap sniping at Eric and his son and the other members of the backroom staff. The club is up against it now and we, the supporters should get behind the team and management and hope that they can perform a minor miracle and keep us in Div 2. Then we can have the postmortem on the admin or lack of in the club, but lets save that until this other business is concluded.
What next?? you could not write the script!

brian owen fan club · 08-03-2007, 20:41

well i hope for the sake of stanley fans that they dont go down because of a cock up by the managagment even some hufc fans would not want them to go down in that fashion.
but with what has happened recently to other clubs im afraid it dont look good for your team.
here is one bulls fan that does not want to see you go down (hope that boston do )

Owd Bob · 08-03-2007, 20:44

OK mistakes happen. You show me a man who never makes a mistake, and I will show you that it's a corpse.

The club, rightly or wrongly, is run on a shoestring budget. The staff must be chasing their tails in a whirlwind of paperwork, and mistakes will obviously happen. T
he simple answer is to take on more staff, but the income of the club cannot justify this due to low attendances. Eric does not want to take the club into debt, and therfore we have to make do with what we can afford - a skeleton staff, who incidently work bloody hard for little reward.

OK a mistake may have been made. Let's not jump to conclusions before we know the facts.

Let's give everyone our moral support, and not criticise too much for what may be a mistake by someone who is working their socks off behind the scenes.

stanleyfan · 08-03-2007, 20:47

Accrington Stanley Football Club is taking expert advice in this matter and can assure supporters that they will take every available option open to them to ensure that League status is maintained
so does this mean that Stanley will loan out players and win every single game left

i don’t think so.

I really hope Stanley get out of this mess. For a lot of people Stanley is the main thing in their life and it would be devastating to see them go down
If we go down then i can’t see us coming back up again in the next season or so because the only place Stanley will get the money from is the ticket sales which will plummet.

Scott_ASFC · 08-03-2007, 21:24

seems abit wierd 4 poitns deduction, i dont want no deduction but, on sky sports news who seem to get all the news stright away they didnt mention any four points apart, thewy did mention AFC wimbeldon got docked 18 points and bury got chucked out of cup!!! only hope all goes well but cant see it only being 4 points

although it could be 2 points a game they play

PaulMullinsForehead · 08-03-2007, 21:56

Well said Tin Monkey, it's time for change at the top, this has happened for a reason. Being a league team is totallly different and Whalley (great job previously) should have gone last season when the time was right. I too am not surprised, this season has been a total anticlimax from day one. Lets face it the club couldn't even get the replica shirts through in time for the new season!!!

Whalley OUT!!!! Macca for Chairman!!!!

lancsdave · 08-03-2007, 22:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scott_ASFC

seems abit wierd 4 poitns deduction, i dont want no deduction but, on sky sports news who seem to get all the news stright away they didnt mention any four points apart, thewy did mention AFC wimbeldon got docked 18 points and bury got chucked out of cup!!! only hope all goes well but cant see it only being 4 points

although it could be 2 points a game they play

They take the games played in by the ineligible player and deduct the points if guilty. Hence 4 regarding McGrail and possibly 3 more for the unnamed player if that game was won. However if he also played in the same game as McGrail they would only take the same number of points away.

wolsey end · 09-03-2007, 07:32

ok. u dont know me, ive never posted on here before. my interest in this is purely financial - ive had a substantial bet on boston utd being relegated. which means i dont want yr mob to go down. i also know quite a bit about the wimbledon story, as i specialise in non lg football (down south).
u know who one player is, the preston loan kid. but u dont know who the other player is. heres a clue as to find out who he is. jermaine darlingtons inneligibility only came about AFTER he had been booked and the paperwork was sent to the FA, where they found out wimbledon hadnt got clearance from the welsh FA - he was previously playing for cardiff. so find out which player u have recently had booked for the first time and that should be yr man.
i dont agree with all this. wimbledon, altrincham last yr, bury this yr (should have been made to replay). as far as im concerned, its sorted out on the pitch, not in some kangaroo court (which is what the FA is).
good luck, but i fear the worst for u.

maccawozzagod · 09-03-2007, 07:38

joe jacobson? he cam eform Cardiff and featured in our draws with Shrewsbury, Macclesfield and Bury and the win at Wrexham. Curtis McDonald also came at the same time and featured in no extra games - he didn't actually play for us so we may be okay there. 5 points from Jacobson and 4 points from the holy McGrail!

2BR have said 3 players, Lancs Telegraph says two. Personally I think they are all ineligible ....... or is that illegitimate?

maccawozzagod · 09-03-2007, 07:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by wolsey end

u know who one player is, the preston loan kid. but u dont know who the other player is. heres a clue as to find out who he is. jermaine darlingtons inneligibility only came about AFTER he had been booked and the paperwork was sent to the FA, where they found out wimbledon hadnt got clearance from the welsh FA

Almeida, Rogers and Jacobson.

All the rest are seasoned campaigners.

lancsdave · 09-03-2007, 08:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by wolsey end

i dont agree with all this. wimbledon, altrincham last yr, bury this yr (should have been made to replay). as far as im concerned, its sorted out on the pitch, not in some kangaroo court (which is what the FA is).

Even though I said the FA in one of my earlier posts it should be made clear it's the Football League which is a totally seperate organisation, and if any consolation slightly less aggressive.

However I do agree that it's pathetic somebody is sat in an office checking that i's have dots and t's are crossed while there are bigger issues ruining the game of football which they clearly turn a blind eye too.

wolsey end · 09-03-2007, 08:21

ok. but try and i find out who has recently received THEIR FIRST BOOKING. thats the only reason darlingtons case at wimbledon came to the FAs attention. if ssn are saying its 18-120 points yr losing, and the other kids lost u 5, then yr looking for a player who has played approx 15points worth of games.

maccawozzagod · 09-03-2007, 08:31

we have earned 15 points since 2/12/06 at home to Shrewsbury so the player would have to be here longer than that, so it aint Mauro or Rogers, Jacobson didnt stop around long enough for 15 minutes.

JEFF · 09-03-2007, 08:46

If I remember rightly Mauro played for the reserves before he had International clearance, maybe this has something to do with it. Didn't we get fined last season for playing that unregistered player in the reserves before he went to Alty. Whose fault was that ? Who got reprimanded for that ? Who resigned over that ? As I said before, if this costs us our league status there had better be resignations, preferably starting at the top. As we have been saying all season - we are a professional club being run by amateurs. We should have learned our lesson last season.