Celtic reinstated into the Champions league

after Legia Warsaw field an illegible player, does that mean that the team finishing 18th last year in the PL gets reinstated instead of Sunderland?

after Legia Warsaw field an illegible player, does that mean that the team finishing 18th last year in the PL gets reinstated instead of Sunderland?

It's quite unbelievable, the legia warsaw player came on for the last 3 minutes of the second leg when the score was already 6-1 (on agg) he had already missed three games for his club, surely in this instance the punishment was far too severe.

after Legia Warsaw field an illegible player, does that mean that the team finishing 18th last year in the PL gets reinstated instead of Sunderland?

It's quite unbelievable, the legia warsaw player came on for the last 3 minutes of the second leg when the score was already 6-1 (on agg) he had already missed three games for his club, surely in this instance the punishment was far too severe.

if you're that far ahead anyway why would you even take the slightest risk by playing an inellgible player?? the manager must have known he was unable to play and for some bizar reason did it anyway, seems crazy but its the same punishment weather its 3 mins or 90

after Legia Warsaw field an illegible player, does that mean that the team finishing 18th last year in the PL gets reinstated instead of Sunderland?

It's quite unbelievable, the legia warsaw player came on for the last 3 minutes of the second leg when the score was already 6-1 (on agg) he had already missed three games for his club, surely in this instance the punishment was far too severe.

Agreed, this is just a screw up made, that clearly had no impact on the result. far too harsh, should get a nominal fine. Septic don't deserve to go through as they were dire

after Legia Warsaw field an illegible player, does that mean that the team finishing 18th last year in the PL gets reinstated instead of Sunderland?

It's quite unbelievable, the legia warsaw player came on for the last 3 minutes of the second leg when the score was already 6-1 (on agg) he had already missed three games for his club, surely in this instance the punishment was far too severe.

if you're that far ahead anyway why would you even take the slightest risk by playing an inellgible player?? the manager must have known he was unable to play and for some bizar reason did it anyway, seems crazy but its the same punishment weather its 3 mins or 90

As i stated, he had already missed three games, (including the first leg against celtic) legia warsaw obviously thought that the ban was over because they could have seen the last 3 minutes out with nine men never mind bringing on a sub.

Can't help but feel that if it was the other way around Celtic would have just been fined and not thrown out... It's another case of the football authorites looking after the big boys! West ham with tevez.. QPR the year they first went up.. Both played with ineligible players for most of theyre respected season did they not.?

Legia Warsaw deserve to be kicked out for their stupidity. The player had not served a three game European ban. If there was doubt they should have enquired about it. If they did not know then they are stupid and ill-informed for not knowing.

It is perhaps a little severe given the circumstances but at the same time this sends a strong message that ineligible players cannot be allowed. I personally don't think there is any excuse for playing banned players and points gained in matches where ineligible players are played should be handed to the opposition.

Can't help but feel that if it was the other way around Celtic would have just been fined and not thrown out... It's another case of the football authorites looking after the big boys! West ham with tevez.. QPR the year they first went up.. Both played with ineligible players for most of theyre respected season did they not.?

I think your talking through your hat.Could you give me an example of when previous clubs have broken this rule they are not chucked out(Different authorities have different rules for league and cup competitions).Rules are rules and if you break the rules thats it.You can't be a little bit pregnant,you iz or you ain't.

Can't help but feel that if it was the other way around Celtic would have just been fined and not thrown out... It's another case of the football authorites looking after the big boys! West ham with tevez.. QPR the year they first went up.. Both played with ineligible players for most of theyre respected season did they not.?

I think your talking through your hat.Could you give me an example of when previous clubs have broken this rule they are not chucked out(Different authorities have different rules for league and cup competitions).Rules are rules and if you break the rules thats it.You can't be a little bit pregnant,you iz or you ain't.

According to Norwegian media (Verdens Gang) similar circumstances have led to fines in the past. Debrecen - Litex in 2010, Debrecen used a non-eligable player in injury time, when the aggregate score was 4-1, and were fined. Reason being that the player coundn't have affected the final outcome.

In 2011 Celtic moved through at the expense of FC Sion because they used a non-eligable player.

http://www.vg.no/sport/fotball/champions-league-2014-15/legia-kastes-ut-av-champions-league/a/23269940/ (Norwegian)

How are a club allowed to name an in eligible player in the match day team for a start?

Why let a team do it? Purely to be able to punish them after?

More terrible practice from the authorities

Nothing strange there by UeFa, the 0:3 is the standard punishment when clubs break any rules, like playing suspended players etc.

Stuttgart once used 4 instead of the allowed 3 imports in their CL away match at Leeds. After Stuttgart won their home tie 3:0 they would have been through to the next round to play Rangers, but they used their 4th import as a sub with a few mins to go, which caused that their 1:4 defat at Leeds got also turned into a 0:3 defeat...

The 1:4 would have meant they are through due to away goals, but now they were tied... a 3rd match was played and Leeds won 2:1, Stuttgart were out...

Legia Warsaw deserve to be kicked out for their stupidity. The player had not served a three game European ban. If there was doubt they should have enquired about it. If they did not know then they are stupid and ill-informed for not knowing.

It is perhaps a little severe given the circumstances but at the same time this sends a strong message that ineligible players cannot be allowed. I personally don't think there is any excuse for playing banned players and points gained in matches where ineligible players are played should be handed to the opposition.

Bang on.

Unreal. Celtic lost 6-1 and doesn't deserve to be in the there. Legia shouldn't have been fined as they have done in similar circumstances before.

after Legia Warsaw field an illegible player, does that mean that the team finishing 18th last year in the PL gets reinstated instead of Sunderland?

It's quite unbelievable, the legia warsaw player came on for the last 3 minutes of the second leg when the score was already 6-1 (on agg) he had already missed three games for his club, surely in this instance the punishment was far too severe.

if you're that far ahead anyway why would you even take the slightest risk by playing an inellgible player?? the manager must have known he was unable to play and for some bizar reason did it anyway, seems crazy but its the same punishment weather its 3 mins or 90

As i stated, he had already missed three games, (including the first leg against celtic) legia warsaw obviously thought that the ban was over because they could have seen the last 3 minutes out with nine men never mind bringing on a sub.

Yep, it was an administrative error. He was elligble for the match, but the club didn't register him. So Celtic got totally trashed on the pitch and appealed because the right paper work wasn't filed on a player that played 3 minutes.
This has nothing to do with sportsmanship, it's burucracy.

Shocking decision

I'd be embarrassed if Cardiff followed that up due to a 3 minute appearance from an un registered player.

I know rules are rules, and the CL is worth millions to Celtic but you have to have some cheek to appeal when you lost 6-1 to a Polish team.

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".

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.

In theory there could be the crazy situation whereby an inelligible player could play in the Champions League and the team get kicked out, then a few days later the same player (again, inelligible but for a different reason) plays in a Premier League game and his side keep the result from the game, but get away with a fine.

Sort it out.

Can't help but feel that if it was the other way around Celtic would have just been fined and not thrown out... It's another case of the football authorites looking after the big boys! West ham with tevez.. QPR the year they first went up.. Both played with ineligible players for most of theyre respected season did they not.?

Big boys?

Oh and the small matter of us contesting it & winning. Legally.

I hope they get pumped in the next round

The decision has just been explained in full, the player concerned got red carded last season for his previous club meaning a three game ban the next time he plays in european competition, he signed for Legia Warsaw in the summer and missed the two games in the previous round (i think against st patricks) and the first leg at home to celtic, he then comes on in the second leg for the last three minutes when the game was alreadt done and dusted, (6-1 agg) uefa are saying that for the three games he missed Legia never registered him in their squad to which the reply from Legia was that because we knew he was banned why would we register him in the squad???? to me this is uefa at their very best/worse, in my opinion a shocking decision which goes against the spirit in which the game should be played.

Bit harsh - surely the game was well lost before he came on

Clubs register players for the qualification rounds, then when they are through the quals they get to register again.

The point of this rule is that if you have a player with a red card he must be registered for the ban to be served. Which again means that the club will have 1 less player in the squad for those matches.
Add injuries and yellow cards during the quals to that and you will start to see the effect of having less players in the squad and the ban is served with consequences.

Legia decided not to register him and brought a full squad to the first 2 qual matches.
That means that he did not serve his ban in those 2 matches and Legia had a benefit as they had a full squad to choose from and could rest players in the second leg.

Uefa could use this penalty to make a point that you cant try to go around the rules to get yourself a benefit. In this case the benefit was not thr 3 minutes with the player but the fact that they had a full squad and rested players in the first qual matches.

Clubs register players for the qualification rounds, then when they are through the quals they get to register again.

The point of this rule is that if you have a player with a red card he must be registered for the ban to be served. Which again means that the club will have 1 less player in the squad for those matches.
Add injuries and yellow cards during the quals to that and you will start to see the effect of having less players in the squad and the ban is served with consequences.

Legia decided not to register him and brought a full squad to the first 2 qual matches.
That means that he did not serve his ban in those 2 matches and Legia had a benefit as they had a full squad to choose from and could rest players in the second leg.

Uefa could use this penalty to make a point that you cant try to go around the rules to get yourself a benefit. In this case the benefit was not thr 3 minutes with the player but the fact that they had a full squad and rested players in the first qual matches.

So because he was banned you are saying they wouldn't have been able to name an 18 man squad for the game? And only a 17 man squad. I think you will find when you have a player suspended you are more than welcome to put another player in the squad in his place. Legia did not benefit from this in any way. It is disgusting, and anyone on favour of this decision must either have some connection to Celtic or are just uefa lovers.

Clubs register players for the qualification rounds, then when they are through the quals they get to register again.

The point of this rule is that if you have a player with a red card he must be registered for the ban to be served. Which again means that the club will have 1 less player in the squad for those matches.
Add injuries and yellow cards during the quals to that and you will start to see the effect of having less players in the squad and the ban is served with consequences.

Legia decided not to register him and brought a full squad to the first 2 qual matches.
That means that he did not serve his ban in those 2 matches and Legia had a benefit as they had a full squad to choose from and could rest players in the second leg.

Uefa could use this penalty to make a point that you cant try to go around the rules to get yourself a benefit. In this case the benefit was not thr 3 minutes with the player but the fact that they had a full squad and rested players in the first qual matches.

So because he was banned you are saying they wouldn't have been able to name an 18 man squad for the game? And only a 17 man squad. I think you will find when you have a player suspended you are more than welcome to put another player in the squad in his place. Legia did not benefit from this in any way. It is disgusting, and anyone on favour of this decision must either have some connection to Celtic or are just uefa lovers.

"uefa lovers"

seriously though, the rules are there. LW knew the rules and the potential punishment. they did it anyway (for seemingly no reason what so ever as the game was won).

weather you agree with the ruling or not, LW knew what might happen if they played the player and played him any.

stupid manager, let the fans down massively. should be ashamed of himself (maybe he had a bet on celtic to go through )

Clubs register players for the qualification rounds, then when they are through the quals they get to register again.

The point of this rule is that if you have a player with a red card he must be registered for the ban to be served. Which again means that the club will have 1 less player in the squad for those matches.
Add injuries and yellow cards during the quals to that and you will start to see the effect of having less players in the squad and the ban is served with consequences.

Legia decided not to register him and brought a full squad to the first 2 qual matches.
That means that he did not serve his ban in those 2 matches and Legia had a benefit as they had a full squad to choose from and could rest players in the second leg.

Uefa could use this penalty to make a point that you cant try to go around the rules to get yourself a benefit. In this case the benefit was not thr 3 minutes with the player but the fact that they had a full squad and rested players in the first qual matches.

So because he was banned you are saying they wouldn't have been able to name an 18 man squad for the game? And only a 17 man squad. I think you will find when you have a player suspended you are more than welcome to put another player in the squad in his place. Legia did not benefit from this in any way. It is disgusting, and anyone on favour of this decision must either have some connection to Celtic or are just uefa lovers.

"uefa lovers"

seriously though, the rules are there. LW knew the rules and the potential punishment. they did it anyway (for seemingly no reason what so ever as the game was won).

weather you agree with the ruling or not, LW knew what might happen if they played the player and played him any.

stupid manager, let the fans down massively. should be ashamed of himself (maybe he had a bet on celtic to go through )

I cant see how they were getting around the rules and then playing him for a couple of minutes when the game was well and truly done.
Its mean spirited by uefa and by celtic.
Celtic lost and should refuse to go through. Horrible club.

You can drive at 70 mph for 3 hours on a motorway, you still won't be allowed to get away with driving at 100 mph for the last minute of your journey.

I know rules are rules but that is so corrupt. Celtic will make the powers that be more money so they'll be rubbing their hands.
Thing is, it could be down to plain stupidity or a genuine error......surely some mitigating circumstances should apply in this case?
Sad thing is, Celtic have been made the enemy over this and will get battered in the next round anyway. Whats the point?

we will eliminat them