Celtic reinstated into the Champions league

In 2010, Uefa fined Debrecen £15,000 but rejected a protest from opponents Litex Lovech, who wanted the Hungarian side kicked out of the tournament for fielding an ineligible player.

Debrecen argued that they fielded Peter Mate in good faith as a substitute in Bulgaria when they were leading 4-1 on aggregate.
Uefa ruled that Debrecen had "no interest in fielding this player for the three last minutes of additional time, when the score was so clearly in its favour".

If that is the case, the Legia-decision is shocking. Such similar circumstances. They should be able to appeal this decision, I reckon? With much money involved, this smells like ec. crime a long, long way. The laws should be equal.

There is a difference in the two matches a lot of people seem to miss though. Debrecen used a player that was not eligible because his name was not listed on teamsheet. Legia used a player that technically was still suspended. The UEFA rules state that the rules on fielding an ineligible player, such as Debrecen's, say that a forfeit may be the result - there is that discretion there.
The rules on fielding a suspended player, such as Legia, say that forfeit shall be the result - no discretion.

UEFA disciplinary regulations article 21.2 and 21.3

People slating Celtic yet they done nothing wrong, incredibly strange.

Imagine complaining about enforcing a rule.

People slating Celtic yet they done nothing wrong, incredibly strange.

Imagine complaining about enforcing a rule.

^ this! its insanity. They put the player on when they'd won, its like they wanted to be punished. Celtic did everything by the book and yet they're the ones being vilafied (sp?)

They were right to be punished tbh. Not Celtics fault what they did.

In 2010, Uefa fined Debrecen £15,000 but rejected a protest from opponents Litex Lovech, who wanted the Hungarian side kicked out of the tournament for fielding an ineligible player.

Debrecen argued that they fielded Peter Mate in good faith as a substitute in Bulgaria when they were leading 4-1 on aggregate.
Uefa ruled that Debrecen had "no interest in fielding this player for the three last minutes of additional time, when the score was so clearly in its favour".

If that is the case, the Legia-decision is shocking. Such similar circumstances. They should be able to appeal this decision, I reckon? With much money involved, this smells like ec. crime a long, long way. The laws should be equal.

There is a difference in the two matches a lot of people seem to miss though. Debrecen used a player that was not eligible because his name was not listed on teamsheet. Legia used a player that technically was still suspended. The UEFA rules state that the rules on fielding an ineligible player, such as Debrecen's, say that a forfeit may be the result - there is that discretion there.
The rules on fielding a suspended player, such as Legia, say that forfeit shall be the result - no discretion.

UEFA disciplinary regulations article 21.2 and 21.3

Thank you, this is a very good explanation. Explains everything.

People slating Celtic yet they done nothing wrong, incredibly strange.

Imagine complaining about enforcing a rule.

^ this! its insanity. They put the player on when they'd won, its like they wanted to be punished. Celtic did everything by the book and yet they're the ones being vilafied (sp?)

I would be embarrassed to take the reinstatement though especially as they lost 6-1 before the player took the pitch.

Allow a walk over into the next round.

But it's modern football so greed kicks in.

People slating Celtic yet they done nothing wrong, incredibly strange.

Imagine complaining about enforcing a rule.

^ this! its insanity. They put the player on when they'd won, its like they wanted to be punished. Celtic did everything by the book and yet they're the ones being vilafied (sp?)

I would be embarrassed to take the reinstatement though especially as they lost 6-1 before the player took the pitch.

Allow a walk over into the next round.

But it's modern football so greed kicks in.

agree, but imagine if city got through to the CL on a technicality (like wales did for world cup '58) and we refused it on those grounds, i know a lot of fans now would say they would be happy but i think in the situation every club wants the best for its team and fans, and if they are legally reinstated in the tournement who are they to question it?

People slating Celtic yet they done nothing wrong, incredibly strange.

Imagine complaining about enforcing a rule.

^ this! its insanity. They put the player on when they'd won, its like they wanted to be punished. Celtic did everything by the book and yet they're the ones being vilafied (sp?)

I would be embarrassed to take the reinstatement though especially as they lost 6-1 before the player took the pitch.

Allow a walk over into the next round.

But it's modern football so greed kicks in.

Nothing about modern football, it's a rule break so they should have known the consequences. He had been sent off previously, surely Legia knew how long his ban was.

What does wind me up however, is when a few Russian players tested positive for banned substances after our game in the euro playoff, all they had was a slap on the wrist and a fine.. A rule break is a rule break. It should be treated the same regardless of it's severity.

This might mean Adam Matthews stays put a while longer. Oddly I think he has a year and a half left on his contract and it expires Xmas 2015. Then again this could be garbage info I have sourced from the internet.

I would like to get AM back here.

This might mean Adam Matthews stays put a while longer. Oddly I think he has a year and a half left on his contract and it expires Xmas 2015. Then again this could be garbage info I have sourced from the internet.

I would like to get AM back here.

He's not even first team for Celtic.

People slating Celtic yet they done nothing wrong, incredibly strange.

Imagine complaining about enforcing a rule.

^ this! its insanity. They put the player on when they'd won, its like they wanted to be punished. Celtic did everything by the book and yet they're the ones being vilafied (sp?)

From what i heard if celtic hadnt made a complaint this never would have happened. The rules are that a complaint must be made allegedly. So this is very much celtics doing. I think it's embarrassing that they made a complaint on a player that played 3 min when they lost 6-1.

People slating Celtic yet they done nothing wrong, incredibly strange.

Imagine complaining about enforcing a rule.

^ this! its insanity. They put the player on when they'd won, its like they wanted to be punished. Celtic did everything by the book and yet they're the ones being vilafied (sp?)

From what i heard if celtic hadnt made a complaint this never would have happened. The rules are that a complaint must be made allegedly. So this is very much celtics doing. I think it's embarrassing that they made a complaint on a player that played 3 min when they lost 6-1.

There's 20 million reasons why they would have complained!

A rule is a f**king rule what part don't people understand?

Who can blame Celtic, if this happened to us would you want us to let it go freely?

People slating Celtic yet they done nothing wrong, incredibly strange.

Imagine complaining about enforcing a rule.

^ this! its insanity. They put the player on when they'd won, its like they wanted to be punished. Celtic did everything by the book and yet they're the ones being vilafied (sp?)

From what i heard if celtic hadnt made a complaint this never would have happened. The rules are that a complaint must be made allegedly. So this is very much celtics doing. I think it's embarrassing that they made a complaint on a player that played 3 min when they lost 6-1.

There's 20 million reasons why they would have complained!

They made the complaint for one reason only. They are a crap team who got totally outclassed over 2 legs by some polish team.

Id be embarrassed if that was cardiff.

People slating Celtic yet they done nothing wrong, incredibly strange.

Imagine complaining about enforcing a rule.

^ this! its insanity. They put the player on when they'd won, its like they wanted to be punished. Celtic did everything by the book and yet they're the ones being vilafied (sp?)

From what i heard if celtic hadnt made a complaint this never would have happened. The rules are that a complaint must be made allegedly. So this is very much celtics doing. I think it's embarrassing that they made a complaint on a player that played 3 min when they lost 6-1.

There's 20 million reasons why they would have complained!

They made the complaint for one reason only. They are a crap team who got totally outclassed over 2 legs by some polish team.

Id be embarrassed if that was cardiff.

I'd be embarrassed with the outcome over 2 legs as well, but I wouldn't be so embarrassed as to turn down a chance of earning £20 million for my club!