IF QPR DONT GET........

A points deduction, and we finish third, do you think CCFC will seek compensation claims from the FA, FL or QPR?.

not unless we lose at Wembley or the semis no .

not unless we lose at Wembley or the semis no .

H Ha, fair point, I guess if we are promoted anyway there would be no need.

Not a lot CCFC can do there ...... just have to accept it and get on with it

QPR's very own Carl Curtis itk man who is usually very very on the ball seems to think the wheels are already in motion with regards to ccfc nudging the media & the fa for action.

Disappointing if true, seems DJ has figured if 2nd spot is out of reach very soon let's step on QPR to go up

Thing is it won't happen.

There is a prescedent set by West Ham/Sheffield United.

That said I just wonder if by taking part in the Play-Off's we would be seen by the courts as accepting the FL/FA decision that QPR shouldn't be deducted points.

Without a points deduction there was no economic loss and so no reason to go to court.

QPR's very own Carl Curtis itk man who is usually very very on the ball seems to think the wheels are already in motion with regards to ccfc nudging the media & the fa for action.

Disappointing if true, seems DJ has figured if 2nd spot is out of reach very soon let's step on QPR to go up

Thing is it won't happen.

Roles reversed qpr would be doing exactly the same!

1 game at a time

QPR's very own Carl Curtis itk man who is usually very very on the ball seems to think the wheels are already in motion with regards to ccfc nudging the media & the fa for action.

Disappointing if true, seems DJ has figured if 2nd spot is out of reach very soon let's step on QPR to go up

Thing is it won't happen.

Roles reversed qpr would be doing exactly the same!

You are probably right mate.

We've earned top spot and promotion, as it stands you haven't.

Will be an interesting 2 weeks that's for sure.

QPR's very own Carl Curtis itk man who is usually very very on the ball seems to think the wheels are already in motion with regards to ccfc nudging the media & the fa for action.

Disappointing if true, seems DJ has figured if 2nd spot is out of reach very soon let's step on QPR to go up

Thing is it won't happen.

Roles reversed qpr would be doing exactly the same!

You are probably right mate.

We've earned top spot and promotion, as it stands you haven't.

Will be an interesting 2 weeks that's for sure.

IF YOU HAVE BEEN FIELDING A PLAYER WHO IS NOT ELIGIBLE TO PLAY THEN YOU HAVE NOT EARNED IT. IT'S CHEATING!!

Remember all the shyte we had over Bellers and all the clubs saying we were cheating?

The word ineligible has NEVER been mentioned once in any of the charges.

As we say down here in the smoke 'don't get it twisted'!

The word ineligible has NEVER been mentioned once in any of the charges.

As we say down here in the smoke 'don't get it twisted'!

He, by rights though should not have been playing without the right documents. = Same difference. = CHEATING!!

Come on Stan say it mun!

the player in question has played a massive part in QPRs success aswell,theyll be in deep shit if its proven that anything has been falsified,Until the facts are made clear however they cant be labelled as cheats,and by god yes Warnock would take it to the highest courts on the planet if the roles were reversed

bitter and twisted
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/footbal ... 947535.stm

lots of compensation

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/footba ... t-Ham.html

so does that mean that all the playoff teams can sue????

I would think the team that finishes 3rd and 7th , should sue if QPR are found guilty and theres no point deduction. Even the relegated teams could sue.
But if they are found innocent , then there should be no fine or points deduction . But if they are guilty as
NW (Tevez affair) said that fining a team thats broken rules is a joke, only point deduction's work.
I dont know much about the seven rules QPR have aledgely broken, I think we all should wait for the outcome , but if they are proved guilty.
Then I hope they take NW advice.
A points deduction for each of the rules they have been found guilty of breaking.
Otherwise whats the point of any of the teams under the FL/FA playing by the rules.

The strange thing here is that people associated with QPR are saying that they will be fined.
Isn't that a combination of ADMITTING CHEATING and a collective belief that they will still get promoted?
So what needs to be clarified is what QPR is guilty of and what the related punishment truly is - that's what the courts will decide but as we can all see its got potential to be very messy.

The strange thing here is that people associated with QPR are saying that they will be fined.
Isn't that a combination of ADMITTING CHEATING and a collective belief that they will still get promoted?
So what needs to be clarified is what QPR is guilty of and what the related punishment truly is - that's what the courts will decide but as we can all see its got potential to be very messy.

I think the legal issue will relate to economic loss not an attempt to overturn the decision of the FA Tribunal.

The team that finishes 3rd (provided they don't win promotion through the play-offs) could argue that QPR's negligent decision to play an ineligible player directly cost them automatic promotion to the Premier League and the millions of pounds that comes with that.

This is what Sheffield United did against West Ham with regard to Tevez.

However, the matter is clouded a bit by the play-offs because if the third placed club take part in the PO (which they almost certainly will) and lost in the Semi or the Final, then QPR’s defence could be that the third placed club accepted the decision of the FA Tribunal and are only taking action through the courts because they lost out on the PO route.

Is there a precedent that supports the theory that taking part in the play offs constitutes acceptance?
Is there an FA rule that states a club is obligated to take part when directed to do so by the FA?

The strange thing here is that people associated with QPR are saying that they will be fined.
Isn't that a combination of ADMITTING CHEATING and a collective belief that they will still get promoted?
So what needs to be clarified is what QPR is guilty of and what the related punishment truly is - that's what the courts will decide but as we can all see its got potential to be very messy.

QPR are guilty of submitting registration documents to the FA in July 2009 that didn't contain FULL disclosure of the 3rd Party Ownership of Faurlin. This is NOT in doubt as when the club submitted contract extension paperwork in October 2010 this 3rd Party ownership situation was discovered, since then the FA have allowed QPR to buy out the 3rd party ownership in line with their reuglations.

But this doesn't change the FACT that Faurlin was not owned by QPR but by a 3rd Party when the original contract documents were submitted in July 2009. The fact the club issued a statement saying "Both QPR and Mr Paladini are confident that there has been no deliberate wrong doing involved" is admitting that they have broken FA regulations just that they didn't mean to do it. Woops

In the scheme of things their No Deliberate Wrong doing quote will count for nothing the club HAS broken FA Regulations.

It is also clear as a result that QPR are in breach of FL Regulation 40.1 regarding the accuracy of registration documents which will mean the tegistration is null and void and the player was ineligible to play.

These matters of FACT will be considered by the FA Regulatory Commission during the hearing next week but believe me this No Deliberate Wrong Doing or Woops defence will not work. The only possible conclusion is a guilty verdict and that decision will be made by the FA Commission and absolutely NO COURTS will be involved in the process.

I think a week Friday the FA will have the big stick out and they will be beating QPR with it absolutely no doubt in my mind.

castleblue I love your conviction in what's right and wrong

castleblue I love your conviction in what's right and wrong

I've worked over 20 years in football administration so I know how Associations view these things and in respect of 3rd party ownership QPR are guilty of breaching the rules it's that simple. What punishment will they get we will find out next week but IMO it will not a fine.

I'm not as sure that they will be found guilty of using or attempting to use an unlicensed agent because they either did or the didn't this ATTEMPTED thing seems a bit weak to me. But if the case is proven expect a 10 point deduction.

Well if Sheff Utd were awarded installments of 5 million for five years by WHU, cos they were relegated because of the Tevez saga,

why shouldn't Cardiff do the same if we end up not getting promoted after finishing third,

look at the money we would have lost by not getting into the PL.

castleblue I love your conviction in what's right and wrong

I've worked over 20 years in football administration so I know how Associations view these things and in respect of 3rd party ownership QPR are guilty of breaching the rules it's that simple. What punishment will they get we will find out next week but IMO it will not a fine.

I'm not as sure that they will be found guilty of using or attempting to use an unlicensed agent because they either did or the didn't this ATTEMPTED thing seems a bit weak to me. But if the case is proven expect a 10 point deduction.

In your opinion Castle do you think Gianni Paladini was trying a fast one because I do.

I take it the QPR defence will be that they didn't realise that as a football league side they had to disclose Alejandro Faurlin third party ownership because the football league didn't incorporate the FA rules until July 2010, which was long after the player signed for QPR.

However, from your explanantion I gather that this doesn't matter because the FA rules on third party ownership were in place when QPR signed Faurlin and there was an absolute requirement to disclose both the FA/FL because of this. There is also the point that they must have known the proceedure as no other club in the FL has been caught out.

I have heard Paladini discribed as West London's answer to Ridsdale so what's your take on the possiblity he could have made an 'honest' (golden ticket style) mistake?

Is there a precedent that supports the theory that taking part in the play offs constitutes acceptance?
Is there an FA rule that states a club is obligated to take part when directed to do so by the FA?

No and Yes playing out the Season as well as participating in TV agreements is part of the members contract. The final outcome is simple re alleged misgivings. Guilty then points deducted or even relegation. Not guilty verdict is highly unlikely. unless FA have missed a vital point of their own rules.

Is there a precedent that supports the theory that taking part in the play offs constitutes acceptance?
Is there an FA rule that states a club is obligated to take part when directed to do so by the FA?

No and Yes playing out the Season as well as participating in TV agreements is part of the members contract. The final outcome is simple re alleged misgivings. Guilty then points deducted or even relegation. Not guilty verdict is highly unlikely. unless FA have missed a vital point of their own rules.

No there is no precedent, but QPR could argue that if Cardiff believed they were wronged then they should have sought an injunction stopping the play-offs whilst the matter was settled in court.

Of course the liklihood of that happening is absolutely remote, but in legal disputes one side will use anything to discredit the other and you couldn't possibly rule out a court agreeing.

If I get nicked for murder I'll have to definitely come here for some advice as everyone is a legal eagle!!

Experts I tell ya!

i'll wait till the outcome before i comment too much,but aint it ironic how neil warnock have been on 2 sides of this fence.Will the people in that hearing listen to some of his past comments....

i'll wait till the outcome before i comment too much,but aint it ironic how neil warnock have been on 2 sides of this fence.Will the people in that hearing listen to some of his past comments....

is it possible he can speak up on what he was preaching