Similar Case To Tevez

[DanMcGeoghan]

Is this not a simiar case to Tevez.......

If that is the case, then the FA set a precendent with West Ham, no points deduction, so it will not happen to us. The FA couldn't do it after the West Ham debacle.

We'll get a fine, worst case scenario a transfer embargo maybe.....

The above are just my thoughts on the matter.

[SirLes]

They introduced new rules after the Tevez case.

Now they may well decide to set a precedent.

[swanleyhoop]

And there are charges which are completely different to that case.
Having lied about it also doesn't help.

[BuzsakyIsGod]

They introduced new rules after the Tevez case.

Now they may well decide to set a precedent.

They didn't in the FL but did in the PL.

[geejaybee]

Is this not a simiar case to Tevez.......

If that is the case, then the FA set a precendent with West Ham, no points deduction, so it will not happen to us. The FA couldn't do it after the West Ham debacle.

We'll get a fine, worst case scenario a transfer embargo maybe.....

The above are just my thoughts on the matter.

The problem is that W.Ham entered a plea of guilty,thus acknowledging a wrong doing,and were just fined.In QPR's case,Palidini & co have challenged the charge which hasn't gone down to well at the FA and as a consequence,QPR are running the risk of having points deducted.

Just on Sky Sports News (12.45pm) that the FA are still waiting for a response from QPR.Nothing changes then with this lot.

[swanleyhoop]

The problem is that W.Ham entered a plea of guilty,thus acknowledging a wrong doing,and were just fined.In QPR's case,Palidini & co have challenged the charge which hasn't gone down to well at the FA and as a consequence,QPR are running the risk of having points deducted.

Just on Sky Sports News (12.45pm) that the FA are still waiting for a response from QPR.Nothing changes then with this lot.

Yeah, and I'm still waiting for my Cardiff tickets from last season.
They'll have a long time to wait.

[Nodge70]

PL rules completely different. The FL have points deductions and demotions as precedents in similar cases (Swindon '89, Spurs '91 and Luton '09 are the ones that immediately spring to mind).

Also - we've tacitally admitted guilt by saying "it was not deliberate" and then there are seperate charges on Paladini about unlicensed agents.

We're up sh1t street chaps.

[Nodge70]

The problem is that W.Ham entered a plea of guilty,thus acknowledging a wrong doing,and were just fined.In QPR's case,Palidini & co have challenged the charge which hasn't gone down to well at the FA and as a consequence,QPR are running the risk of having points deducted.

Just on Sky Sports News (12.45pm) that the FA are still waiting for a response from QPR.Nothing changes then with this lot.

Takes 9 months to get a scarf!

[WeAreQPR12]

Takes 9 months to get a scarf!

Funny and true but not even in the mood to smile. You are right to inform fans that they should expect a points deduction.

[G.T.P]

we will NOT get any points deducted. FACT

[SirLes]

we will NOT get any points deducted. FACT

Phew. Everyone can relax again.

[G.T.P]

Phew. Everyone can relax again.

well said. glad ive put you at ease man.

[dave58]

the rule regarding 3rd parties didn't exist until the west ham case and then the F.A. brought in the new rules covering that side of things, it's the other stuff falsifying documents, unlisenced agents thats worrying

[qblockpete]

this is not like the Tevez case.

[Bluehoop]

PL rules completely different. The FL have points deductions and demotions as precedents in similar cases (Swindon '89, Spurs '91 and Luton '09 are the ones that immediately spring to mind).

Also - we've tacitally admitted guilt by saying "it was not deliberate" and then there are seperate charges on Paladini about unlicensed agents.We're up sh1t street chaps.

Not your normal style Nodge. You have posted something in quotes, therefore suggesting it is what was said - however, the statement does not say IT. By inserting that word you suggest an admission of guilt and als go on to say we have admitted it.
The wording, including reference to any deliberate wrong doing, is in no way an admission of guilt yet, by mis-quoting the statement to the effect "it was not deliberate" implies that we did it but not on purpose.