Clicky Clicky

Bit harsh in my opinion, would assume they will try and appeal against it.

Good enough for them .

Nothing against Dumbfarmlife, but I think this is the right decision. The playing of ineligible players seems to have been a common theme the last few years and the resulting press brings the game in this country into disrepute and it needs to be stamped out.

The fines that were being handed out prior to this were doing little to temper the issue....What's a ?10,000 or ?15,000 fine compared to many times that for progressing to the next round, and the money that takes in?...so the only option if clubs aren't getting their act together is expulsion.

The only thing I would add is that there's perhaps an argument that referees should be attending games with more information on illegible players in order to prevent it in the first place....but ignorance is no defence on the clubs part as they, more than anyone, should be aware of who is and who is not eligible and if they have any doubts they can consult the lists sent out or make a phone call.

Very harsh.

They admitted to making the mistake, guessing it isn't the last of it either.

I could see the point that a mistake had been made if Woods had come to DA from another club carrying the ban. As it is Dunfermline have known for a year that he was ineligible and should have been more careful.

I could see the point that a mistake had been made if Woods had come to DA from another club carrying the ban. As it is Dunfermline have known for a year that he was ineligible and should have been more careful.

Would agree with that Alex, a costly mistake but I think the correct decision

Its comparable to the punishment Brechin received so justifiable.

I know the SPL used to issue a bulletin to clubs each week listing banned players for upcoming fixtures, but wonder whether the SFL and SFA do the same ... if so, there is no excuse. If they are relying on the club to "remember" from the previous season's competition then perhaps it is a bit harsh as a simple circular to all clubs at the start of each season's competition would solve the issue.

Seems a bit harsh considering they were 4-0 up when he was introduced to the game.

Agree it should be punished though, so if this is the decision I guess they will just have to accept it

It is the right decision.... Given that both player and club would have been notified of the suspension in writing, by the SFA, this was a ludicrous oversight.

Great news for Stenhousemuir.... Celtic (or Morton) in the next round!

I also feel this decision is harsh. Surely it is time for suspensions caused by yellow/red cards to be effective in the next competitive games, whatever the competition, rather than hanging about until the following season as in this case.

I also feel this decision is harsh. Surely it is time for suspensions caused by yellow/red cards to be effective in the next competitive games, whatever the competition, rather than hanging about until the following season as in this case.

totally agree and it is the case with reds (for violent behaviour at least) that they are but I guess the points system suffers from the fact that we have the SPL, SFL and SFA all running their own separate organisations.

Its comparable to the punishment Brechin received so justifiable.

I know the SPL used to issue a bulletin to clubs each week listing banned players for upcoming fixtures, but wonder whether the SFL and SFA do the same ... if so, there is no excuse. If they are relying on the club to "remember" from the previous season's competition then perhaps it is a bit harsh as a simple circular to all clubs at the start of each season's competition would solve the issue.

The SFA publish a disciplinary list every thursday. This is put on their website and, as I understand it, faxed to every club concerned.

This weeks list HERE

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/s...ups/8450310.stm

ok, definitely think this is the correct decision now ... the article in the first post of this thread doesnt say anything about notification, but the link above (from an earlier story) says: "Despite Dunfermline's plea of ignorance, BBC Scotland has seen the list of suspended players, which includes Woods, and understands the same document was sent to the Fife club. ".

didn't expect that.... complete joke of a decision. Brechin were ordered to replay their game with a fine until they found out a second player was ineligable (?) Dunfermline brought Woods on for 5 minutes when they were already 6 goals up

Terrfic news for Stenny, used to play 7-a-side on their pitch during the week... no way they can handle OF fans coming to the stadium though, I wouldn't be suprised if the fixture is moved to Falkirk stadium or Forthbank.

Does anyone else think something's a bit off about this decision??? Maybe a few pennies have changed hand to make sure they got the very profitable Celtic fixture??? (assuming they beat Morton)

Its comparable to the punishment Brechin received so justifiable.

Not quite. Brechin initially received a fine and were ordered to replay their fixture when it was thought that they had played one ineligilible player. Once it transpired that they had played two they were kicked out.

I know the SPL used to issue a bulletin to clubs each week listing banned players for upcoming fixtures, but wonder whether the SFL and SFA do the same ... if so, there is no excuse. If they are relying on the club to "remember" from the previous season's competition then perhaps it is a bit harsh as a simple circular to all clubs at the start of each season's competition would solve the issue.

The bulletin is on the website for all to see: List of Suspensions

Dunfermline's excuse is that they looked at the wrong list: Cup Cautions

It's a poor excuse really, beacuse that list clearly states at the top of the page:

THIS LIST DETAILS ALL THE PLAYERS WHO HAVE INCURRED CAUTIONS IN THE RESPECTIVE SPECIFIED CUP

COMPETITIONS. THE NAMES OF PLAYERS WHO HAVE INCURRED SUSPENSIONS AS A RESULT OF RECEIVING CAUTIONS ARE RECORDED IN THE WEEKLY LIST OF SUSPENSIONS.

Providing clubs had been informed that they have to check these lists on a weekly basis, then Dunfermline don't have a leg to stand on. Correct decision.

does this mean tht stenhousemuir are bak in the cup or wot???

Yup....stenhousemuir are back in the draw.

for the record.....it wasnt just 1 rule break..it was for about 4 rule breaks that dumbfamrers got the dunt out of the cup.

It's not the punishment but the inconsistancy of the "make it up as we go along" SFA that concerns me.Pretty harsh punishment and consequences for what was obviously an administrative error with no gain from the player coming on,compared with other clubs blatantly cheating and playing players signed as consultants resulting in paltry fines for the club concerned ( not that i'm bitter) About time clear and concise rules and resultant punishments for breach were introduced so clubs know where they stand.

Edited January 14, 201016 yr by Heilandee

Everyone needs to note Smee's post.

First of all, the Scottish Cup needs credibility, and in the last few years Breechin and Elgin have technically brought it in disrepute by playing players clearly banned. So every team in the Scottish Cup knows that do something as silly as that is both negligent and in danger of belittling the competition a bit more.

That is why I mentioned in the Motherwell thread and it is clear Lionel is banned from our team lines. I would assume that Terry and Maurice are competent enough to check this on our behalf.

The management at Dunfermline have missed Woods suspension in about 25 SFA newsletters. That is pretty incompetent and more so that Woods was not aware of it.

If you look at what happened on the day the refree appears to have pointed out that Dunfermline's team did not include the requisite number of registered under 21 players. It appears the lines were changed close to kick off and a player brought into the team. In today's hearing it looks as though there was another infringement.

If there were four infringements that is gross incompetence and raises serious questions about the management at Dunfermline. The decision to expel was right and proper. It also raises the question about other aspects of Dunfermline's administration and management. We cannot take the field against Motherwell knowing the game's administrators tolerate sloppy administration of team rules.

Dunfermline have defended their decision to put Buffy in charge of administration. The team lines are in beautiful pink.

If you look at what happened on the day the refree appears to have pointed out that Dunfermline's team did not include the requisite number of registered under 21 players. It appears the lines were changed close to kick off and a player brought into the team. In today's hearing it looks as though there was another infringement.

That is correct, they didn't actually submit team line up which was duly signed by a club official as is required. A minor technicality, perhaps, but part of an overall shambles or disregard for the rules.

Interestingly when the teams were announced on Radio Scotland, Pars fans emailed and texted in pointing out that the player was suspended. Did none of them contact the club?

Out of interest, what should the BBC or journalists do if they know prior to kick off the club have made such an error? Step in and help the club, or just let nature take its course like a wildlife film crew who watch baby animals getting eaten alive?

Out of interest, what should the BBC or journalists do if they know prior to kick off the club have made such an error? Step in and help the club, or just let nature take its course like a wildlife film crew who watch baby animals getting eaten alive?

Does anyone think had Celtic or Rangers made the same mistake they would be thrown out of the cup?. I Don't

Does anyone think had Celtic or Rangers made the same mistake they would be thrown out of the cup?. I Don't

Yes and no IMO.

Yes: if you have publicised that either or both the old firm had been kicked out ofthe comp, it would bring big attention from the press about it.

No: the footballing bodies are bum lickers to the old firm.

To answer an earlier point about suspensions being carried into the next competitive game. This is why people are crying out for ONE body in scotland. The lad Woods was suspended in the SFA Scottish Cup(or picked up enough points i dont know) so he would be automatically be suspended for the next SFA competitive match(which if you team was unlucky to lose in the game you got suspended from) then it would be about 12 months away. Thats why League Cup bans carry on into the league as its run by the SFL and seeing that the SPL dont run a separate cup competition, they have agreed to adopt the SFL League Cup as their own. Thats why if your suspended in Europe, you can still play domestic.

The team sheet went out to the fans about half an hour before KO and fans were phoning the club office to say the player was suspended and made every effort possible to tell someone but no one was about.

Personally think a tad harsh. I just wonder if a fine would have been the punishment had the prize not been a possilble next round game with Celtic.

As for the OF well if they made this mistake I think the punishment would have to be the same now the precident has been set - wouldn't it ?

Do agree that life would be easier if suspension served at next competitive game but aint burocracy grand.