SA Footy

This is a big issue regarding the qualification of an MV U18 player in last weeks GF.

After playing all year at MVFC (in senior grades bar 3 U18 games) the SFL have decided to strip MV of their premiership.

What do we think is appropriate?

I think Fine only.

Sorry just a quick edit to options.

Vote again.

White Line Fever wrote:This is a big issue.

What do we think is appropriate?

I think Fine only.

If the SFL are so adamdant about their rules perhaps they should read their OWN constitution.

[b]Clubs playing unqualified players in Finals $1,500 Team will bedisqualified from taking further part Refer
SFL Const Re g 10 Part 3.ii) Min Fine. in the F inals Series. Referred to:- Invest igations Committee.[/b]

As this was not actually discovered until after the series - surely a fine is all that can be imposed?

I'm the other. I vote we tar and feather the SFL official who looks like Hagrid from Harry Potter.

frenzy wrote:

White Line Fever wrote:This is a big issue.

What do we think is appropriate?

I think Fine only.

If the SFL are so adamdant about their rules perhaps they should read their OWN constitution.

[b]Clubs playing unqualified players in Finals $1,500 Team will bedisqualified from taking further part Refer
SFL Const Re g 10 Part 3.ii) Min Fine. in the F inals Series. Referred to:- Invest igations Committee.[/b]

As this was not actually discovered until after the series - surely a fine is all that can be imposed?

That's the way I read things.

First and foremost the big loser here is football.

I doubt that anyone from Cove would want the game awarded to Cove.

The rule is very clear. It was tigtened a few years ago after a club (u18) were caught dodgying the team sheets for kids who had been playing at SANFL clubs. It also takes into account that College kids must play six games at their club, rather than just come back at finals time. It also takes the dual teams into consideration. It stops the clubs with dual teams loading up Sunday teams at finals time if the Saturday sides gets knocked out or does not make the finals. For some reason some people rather than developing kids just want to win at all costs, so there needs to be a rule to stop loading of sides for the self gratification of some coaches and parents.

It is a hard one even during the Home and Away Season a Sunday u14 team got caught out playing unqualified/unregistered player in order to load up a team just make finals.

The rule should however be modified to allow kids that play senior footy at their club to come back to their age group if not required in the seniors or the seniors knocked out. We should be encouraging kids to play as high as they can.

If we dont have rules we have anarchy.

JUNIORS
i) To be eligible to play in the f inals of an age group, a play er sha ll have played six ( 6) matches in
that age group, wi th that club dur ing the season, in e ither or both the Saturday or Sunday
competit ion – this excl udes t he 10 nom inated Saturday pl ayers, who wi ll be ineligible to play
Sunday competit ion in their age group after th e nom inated round s pecif ied by the Board of
Directors each year. This doe s not preclude a ju nior player from p laying in a h igher grade.
ii) Junior player/s can onl y play for either th eir S.F. L. Club or a SANFL Club at U nder
16’s or a higher level, on any given weekend
iii) A Saturday junior age group pla yer will be ineligible to play in finals of the Sunday
Competition if the player plays more tha n the st ipulated number of matches (10) in the Saturday
competit ion.

Down the Hill wrote:I'm the other. I vote we tar and feather the SFL official who looks like Hagrid from Harry Potter.

As I have heard it, he was the one giving advice on player qualification only to turn around and point it out to the league... must be some sour grapes down at Reynella.

Zelezny Chucks wrote:

Down the Hill wrote:I'm the other. I vote we tar and feather the SFL official who looks like Hagrid from Harry Potter.

As I have heard it, he was the one giving advice on player qualification only to turn around and point it out to the league... must be some sour grapes down at Reynella.

reynella?

I think have a rematch - maybe Wed night at Happy Valley and the SFL should fine themselves for being so disorganised
Bring back Jan Bache - wouldnt have happened

Zelezny Chucks wrote:

Down the Hill wrote:I'm the other. I vote we tar and feather the SFL official who looks like Hagrid from Harry Potter.

As I have heard it, he was the one giving advice on player qualification only to turn around and point it out to the league... must be some sour grapes down at Reynella.

Was he X m/vale

recruiter 10 wrote:

Zelezny Chucks wrote:

Down the Hill wrote:I'm the other. I vote we tar and feather the SFL official who looks like Hagrid from Harry Potter.

As I have heard it, he was the one giving advice on player qualification only to turn around and point it out to the league... must be some sour grapes down at Reynella.

Was he X m/vale

No he used to be involved at Cove, but his previous affiliation really isn't relevant here.

It should have been picked up in the 1st match Morphett Vale played, and then the club beaten by the Emus would have progressed through to next final instead, and the Emus should have been disqualified at that point of the finals.

White Line Fever wrote:This is a big issue regarding the qualification of an MV U18 player in last weeks GF.

After playing all year at MVFC (in senior grades bar 3 U18 games) the SFL have decided to strip MV of their premiership.

What do we think is appropriate?

I think Fine only.

What would have made him 'qualified'

Obviously not 3 games?

Surely the club realised that he was not qualified?

A Mum wrote:

White Line Fever wrote:This is a big issue regarding the qualification of an MV U18 player in last weeks GF.

After playing all year at MVFC (in senior grades bar 3 U18 games) the SFL have decided to strip MV of their premiership.

What do we think is appropriate?

I think Fine only.

What would have made him 'qualified'

Obviously not 3 games?

Surely the club realised that he was not qualified?

6 games in SFL A Mum.

Can't comment on if MV knew but it looks like a clerical error as opposed to cheating IMO.

Okay - thanks WLF.

Well if it's a clerical error as opposed to 'cheating' that's very harsh taking away the whole premiership

Got to feel for the 'kids' really.

So I'm guessing the paperwork says 3 games, but he actually physically played more in U18?

This topic is getting spread between two threads so leave this as the poll and if you want to view discussion:

viewtopic.php?f=41&t=29835&start=300

Has a final decision been made by the SFL?
Im looking to wrap up my tipping comp!

A Mum wrote:Okay - thanks WLF.

Well if it's a clerical error as opposed to 'cheating' that's very harsh taking away the whole premiership

Got to feel for the 'kids' really.

So I'm guessing the paperwork says 3 games, but he actually physically played more in U18?

my understanding A mum (and there is every chance i'm wrong!) is that during the regular H&A season, he did only play 3 games in U18's, and 15 or so in A/B Grades.

Letter has been forwarded to club Secretaries that the SFL Investigations Committee has met and decision has been made.
The SFL have officially requested Morphett Vale FC return all Premiership items to the league, and the Premiership Title for 2010 has been awarded to Cove FC.

85 WAS A GOOD YEAR wrote:Letter has been forwarded to club Secretaries that the SFL Investigations Committee has met and decision has been made.
The SFL have officially requested Morphett Vale FC return all Premiership items to the league, and the Premiership Title for 2010 has been awarded to Cove FC.

Good luck getting all the medals back from the players!!