Southern Cricket Association 2009-10

[smithy]

Now that is definitely against the spirit of the game.

[shoe boy]

the SCA MUST act as this is blatant cheeting!!! !

It is a very small world and after receiving some info on this I also made inquires as a good friend plays baseball for the said club and confirmed that you cant be in 2 places at the same time.

SCA do what you are required to and inforce the rules.

Any news on the special investigation meeting held last night regarding this matter????

[shoe boy]

the SCA MUST act as this is blatant cheeting!!! !

It is a very small world and after receiving some info on this I also made inquires as a good friend plays baseball for the said club and confirmed that you cant be in 2 places at the same time.

SCA do what you are required to and inforce the rules.

Any news on the special investigation meeting held last night regarding this matter????

My mail has the said player has been banned but the club that instigated the cheeting will continue in the semi

If I was the ICC I would not be happy

[Super Fred]

the SCA MUST act as this is blatant cheeting!!! !

It is a very small world and after receiving some info on this I also made inquires as a good friend plays baseball for the said club and confirmed that you cant be in 2 places at the same time.

SCA do what you are required to and inforce the rules.

Any news on the special investigation meeting held last night regarding this matter????

My mail has the said player has been banned but the club that instigated the cheeting will continue in the semi

If I was the ICC I would not be happy

What a joke this SCA committee is, no balls, double standards in handing out punishments...a club blatantly cheats and they get to stay in the finals...The result should have been a forfeit due to fielding an ineligible player which usually happens in every other sport. Guarantee you if it was any other club bar ICC that missed out, a more severe punishment would have been handed out...also heard no ICC rep at the meeting to voice their grievances (probably wouldn't have turned up anyway on previous track record). Time for these muppets to stand down or grow a set. Really do not see much difference in this case as opposed to round 1 in the C Grade where Noarlunga used an extra bowler but were docked all match points won and an extra 3 for good measure.
Flagstaff Hill have luckily got away with it this time but no doubt their players will be reminded of this on the weekend

[Danger Mouse]

What to stop this happening agian?

[krustymirkin]

Superfred for president im sure the sca committee wouldnt mind,

[Super Fred]

Superfred for president im sure the sca committee wouldnt mind,

Whats your take on this Krusty? If your team was to lose a semi final and the ineligible player took 5 for, would you be happy for the team that cheated to progress?...surely not.

[krustymirkin]

Superfred for president im sure the sca committee wouldnt mind,

Whats your take on this Krusty? If your team was to lose a semi final and the ineligible player took 5 for, would you be happy for the team that cheated to progress?...surely not.

I understand your frustration with this situation,but to impose that the game is forfieted does that mean that flag hill should not have made finals,thus meaning Cove or Seaford should have made finals.We would have to go back and start the final again,making Noar and Porties wait another week to see who their opponent would be.I have no doubt Flaggies have dodged a bullet,but a can of worms would have been opened up by this action,other games by other clubs show that players were also named who seem to be not present on the day,or that sides have gone in ,at a later date and changed team sheets,maybe we need to go back to only 11 players in a game,me personaly like the 12 man rule,its just open to abuse.The captains need to ask for a team sheet before the game it seems the only way to stop this from happening,the player has been banned from playing given the circumstances provided,cant go back only forward.

[Super Fred]

Superfred for president im sure the sca committee wouldnt mind,

Whats your take on this Krusty? If your team was to lose a semi final and the ineligible player took 5 for, would you be happy for the team that cheated to progress?...surely not.

I understand your frustration with this situation,but to impose that the game is forfieted does that mean that flag hill should not have made finals,thus meaning Cove or Seaford should have made finals.We would have to go back and start the final again,making Noar and Porties wait another week to see who their opponent would be.I have no doubt Flaggies have dodged a bullet,but a can of worms would have been opened up by this action,other games by other clubs show that players were also named who seem to be not present on the day,or that sides have gone in ,at a later date and changed team sheets,maybe we need to go back to only 11 players in a game,me personaly like the 12 man rule,its just open to abuse.The captains need to ask for a team sheet before the game it seems the only way to stop this from happening,the player has been banned from playing given the circumstances provided,cant go back only forward.

No, Flagstaff Hill should have made the finals as the issue is the player did not PLAY enough games during the minor rounds to play in the Semi. They are also cheating themselves by naming 12 and playing with 11 during the minor rounds. Not to mention someone missing out on getting a game.
As you said the 12 man rule is open to abuse and has been well abused since its inception.
But in this circumstance only the player has been punished when it has been the Captains decision to name him...and surely their committee knew about this.

[krustymirkin]

no, it was not that the player had played enough days,it was that the player wasnt registered,when playing those days.So you see the can of worms that could be opened up,are all their points then valid for them games,if not then what of Cove or Seaford what legal leg do they have to stand on.

[Super Fred]

no, it was not that the player had played enough days,it was that the player wasnt registered,when playing those days.So you see the can of worms that could be opened up,are all their points then valid for them games,if not then what of Cove or Seaford what legal leg do they have to stand on.

So he also was not registered...which makes the club even more culpable. In this instance i think the decision would have been easier to disqualify the team for the remainder of the season. And yes the points Flagstaff Hill accumulated when he was named should have been docked....How is it that the association committee did not even know he was unregistered?

[krustymirkin]

no, it was not that the player had played enough days,it was that the player wasnt registered,when playing those days.So you see the can of worms that could be opened up,are all their points then valid for them games,if not then what of Cove or Seaford what legal leg do they have to stand on.

So he also was not registered...which makes the club even more culpable. In this instance i think the decision would have been easier to disqualify the team for the remainder of the season. And yes the points Flagstaff Hill accumulated when he was named should have been docked....How is it that the association committee did not even know he was unregistered?

It shows how much this way of doing match returns has it bugs to iron out before we can say it is honest,and not open to abuse. The assoc committee is run by members of the clubs,not only running their own clubs but also the assoc.Can you explain to me how a player can be named without being registered its impossible to be done on the website or is it?How many others are out there then?

[Super Fred]

no, it was not that the player had played enough days,it was that the player wasnt registered,when playing those days.So you see the can of worms that could be opened up,are all their points then valid for them games,if not then what of Cove or Seaford what legal leg do they have to stand on.

So he also was not registered...which makes the club even more culpable. In this instance i think the decision would have been easier to disqualify the team for the remainder of the season. And yes the points Flagstaff Hill accumulated when he was named should have been docked....How is it that the association committee did not even know he was unregistered?

It shows how much this way of doing match returns has it bugs to iron out before we can say it is honest,and not open to abuse. The assoc committee is run by members of the clubs,not only running their own clubs but also the assoc.Can you explain to me how a player can be named without being registered its impossible to be done on the website or is it?How many others are out there then?

So what deems a player registered or unregistered with the association....Is there still a paper trail or is it all done online.
How is it that the player in question became unregistered considering he played last season.

[krustymirkin]

no, it was not that the player had played enough days,it was that the player wasnt registered,when playing those days.So you see the can of worms that could be opened up,are all their points then valid for them games,if not then what of Cove or Seaford what legal leg do they have to stand on.

So he also was not registered...which makes the club even more culpable. In this instance i think the decision would have been easier to disqualify the team for the remainder of the season. And yes the points Flagstaff Hill accumulated when he was named should have been docked....How is it that the association committee did not even know he was unregistered?

It shows how much this way of doing match returns has it bugs to iron out before we can say it is honest,and not open to abuse. The assoc committee is run by members of the clubs,not only running their own clubs but also the assoc.Can you explain to me how a player can be named without being registered its impossible to be done on the website or is it?How many others are out there then?

So what deems a player registered or unregistered with the association....Is there still a paper trail or is it all done online.
How is it that the player in question became unregistered considering he played last season.

Its all done online,now you can see why the assoc did what it did,too many faults in the system,too hard to prove

[shoe boy]

Good debate lads but what is done is done and we learn and move forward.

Now everyone that is not playing this week get down to Porties and give Flaggies the shit they deserve!!!!!

Good luck to all sides playing finals this week except f/hill

[The Hound]

No, Flagstaff Hill should have made the finals as the issue is the player did not PLAY enough games during the minor rounds to play in the Semi. They are also cheating themselves by naming 12 and playing with 11 during the minor rounds. Not to mention someone missing out on getting a game.
As you said the 12 man rule is open to abuse and has been well abused since its inception.
But in this circumstance only the player has been punished when it has been the Captains decision to name him...and surely their committee knew about this.[/quote]

This is one reason why our club voted against it when it was applied a few years ago.
SB the shoes have been an excellent exponent of this rule in the past, especially for an A Grade player who had to wear his blue uniform and be on duty. This comment no way insists that the Shoes cheated, just used the rule to their advantage. I played in a couple of games when the player arrived after tea once his shift had finished.

[shoe boy]

Agree but within the rules of naming 12!

And we must look after our members of the constabulary

[Tiger Couple]

I think Flaggies should have been made to forfiet the Semi and ICC go through.

The way around these issues of 12 players is simple and a couple things can sort it out.
1. Every team must hand over a team sheet at the toss listing the 12 players to Bat/Bowl/Wicketkeep. (These teams sheet can be sent to the Association after every game or held on to by the teams and sent back at the end of season)
2. Once results have been entered and confirmed the Team List and Results should be locked so teams can't access the page to change information from games.
3. Come finals time the Association should send out to all Clubs players that have qualified for that grade (list will be longer for some grades if you have multiply teams qualified players can move around as the club chooses). It also could be given to the Umpire/s and they can check Team Sheets against the list and advise a team if someone is not on the Association list that they have named.

Just some simple ideas to prevent these issues after the game.

[Super Fred]

B Grade Prelim
Noarlunga Vs the cheats
Noarlunga 241
M.Kegal 80

[smithy]

A;s - Port 150ish all out with 5 overs to go

C's - Port 189 all out with 2 overs to go