Rumours spreading that Danny Wilson may have been ineligible for Hearts yesterday as he was sent off for Rangers in the last game he played in the competition three years ago. He wasn't on the SFA's published list of players who were ineligible to play in this weekend's games but the same list also says the following:

 

"IT DOES NOT DETAIL THE SUSPENSION OF ANY PLAYER WHO HAS BEEN UNREGISTERED FOR MORE THAN ONE SEASON  – THIS 
INFORMATION MUST BE CHECKED DIRECTLY WITH THE DISCIPLINARY DEPARTMENT."

 

The only other ways that Hearts could be in the right by playing him are if either:

- He was suspended for the next game for Rangers in the league (he obviously wasn't as he played in the next game for them)

Or

- Suspensions cross borders and it was served at his time at Liverpool (not sure of the rule for this)

 

Is this something the club should look at or mere straw clutching? 

Edited January 27, 201313 yr by Guest

The SFA can say all they want but unless they can provide any kind of written evidence to suggest he was actually suspended for a game as opposed to simply not being picked then this case is still wide open. The fact they dont have accurate details to suggest when and who it was served against makes me think they dont have what they need.

 

Bear in mind though that the SFA don't have access to the disciplinary records of other countries. They would have to ask the FA and wait for a response, assuming the FA are obliged to respond to such a request at all.

I coach under 13 football and kids cannot play in ANY cup game unless they have played 2 previous league games, to stop clubs bringing players in just for cup games. Why is this not in place in the top level ? why were Hearts able to bring in 2 players just before i Cup Semi? this is the issue i have.

The SFA can say all they want but unless they can provide any kind of written evidence to suggest he was actually suspended for a game as opposed to simply not being picked then this case is still wide open. The fact they dont have accurate details to suggest when and who it was served against makes me think they dont have what they need.

 

Bear in mind though that the SFA don't have access to the disciplinary records of other countries. They would have to ask the FA and wait for a response, assuming the FA are obliged to respond to such a request at all.

 

Then i hope the FA can put this to bed for everyone.

The SFA can say all they want but unless they can provide any kind of written evidence to suggest he was actually suspended for a game as opposed to simply not being picked then this case is still wide open. The fact they dont have accurate details to suggest when and who it was served against makes me think they dont have what they need.

  Bear in mind though that the SFA don't have access to the disciplinary records of other countries. They would have to ask the FA and wait for a response, assuming the FA are obliged to respond to such a request at all.

  Then i hope the FA can put this to bed for everyone.

They are unwilling to do so as they keep saying ask the SFA

BBC story updated

 

Inverness had been aiming to reach their first major cup final, losing to Hearts on penalties at Easter Road .

Their manager Terry Butcher told reporters at his team's media conference on Tuesday that he considered the matter closed.

He said: "The club wanted clarity from the SFA; it has got that.

"The ban was served down south and that is fine with us. As far as we are concerned Danny Wilson was eligible to play, he played very well and that is the end of the story.

"Hearts are in the final and we wish them good luck."

 

All efforts from the team now on tomorrow and beyond.

just seen on Sky that his ban was served at Liverpool, so SFA are happy. Put it to bed now

Served at Liverpool according to the SFA....

If the club are happy with the SFA response, well I am disgusted at the clubs capitulation. To give up so easily is astounding.  Most of us are not looking for a replay or to go straight into the final, that was never an option, but, we want clarity and proof that we lost fair and square.

sfa say 'it would have been served in his first league game for liverpool against arsenal' they still provide no evidence. its not hard, absolute farce.

I am assuming before Butcher made that statement that the club have now been furnished with evidence that the ban was served in a specific match. Surely; that evidence should now be placed in the public domain,

 

Even if that is the case, the ban was imposed by the SFA and was competition specific. Breathtaking arrogance on the part of the English FA, to ignore that just because they don't operate similar rules.

Edited January 29, 201313 yr by Kingsmills

If the club are happy with the SFA response, well I am disgusted at the clubs capitulation. To give up so easily is astounding.  Most of us are not looking for a replay or to go straight into the final, that was never an option, but, we want clarity and proof that we lost fair and square.

 

If the club have indeed capitulated without seeing evidence that the ban was served at a specific match then I am more than disappointed.If that is the case, they have let the fans down extremely badly.

Watch Zaliukas and Robinson go on loan to a club in England and then they can play in final - Farce.

The Squirel who works for the Guardian and is claiming ban was served in the Liverpool v Arsenal match in 2010 should really have checked his papers own archives....

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2010/aug/13/squad-sheets-liverpool-arsenal

I think that Caley D already found that this suspension for the Liverpool v Arsenal game is unfounded. It quite clearly states that Liverpool had no suspended players. If Wilson was suspended by the English FA, surely they would list the player as suspended, otherwise we have to assume that he was NOT suspended. Otherwise the SFA could just randomly pick any game that Danny Wilson didnt appear in.  Mackay, Warren, Foran, Meekings etc should go on loan to Iceland for a couple of weeks in the Summer to get rid of their yellow card suspensions.

Lies, Lies, Lies!!!!!!!! but I suppose we just move on now.

club have let the fans down

 

I don't get some of the reaction here. The SFA have been consistent from start to finish, there's no evidence at all that they have been inaccurate or dishonest anywhere, and ICT have accepted the explanation they were given, which I'd imagine would have been fuller than the few words tweeted publicly by the SFA.

Would Liverpool not be able to confirm why Wilson wasn't played or if he was suspended?

Edited January 29, 201313 yr by Renegade

More Railroad than f3ckin Casey Jones >>>

 

Someone has bu66ered up and as usual the SFA just tow the party line.

 

What more should we expect? 

Some more history on Wilson here....

 

http://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/en/danny-wilson/leistungsdaten/spieler_103819_2010.html

 

Nothing to go on though.... lets hump St Mirren tomorrow.

 

Billy Mackay - he scores when he wants - let's get going on that goal tally again and then hump Kilmarnock on Saturday.  There is still opportunity for silverware.

Something stinks.

Some more history on Wilson here....

 

http://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/en/danny-wilson/leistungsdaten/spieler_103819_2010.html

 

Nothing to go on though.... lets hump St Mirren tomorrow.

 

Billy Mackay - he scores when he wants - let's get going on that goal tally again and then hump Kilmarnock on Saturday.  There is still opportunity for silverware.

 

That link is very good. According to that Danny Wilson played an under 21 game before the Arsenal game and was on the bench for the European qualifier and he wasn't introduced to premier league football till November. 

Something isn't right. 

Edited January 29, 201313 yr by ICTRoughi

Personally think it was a genuine mistake and Hearts should be in Final (if we had taken our chances there would have been no issue anyway) but the cronies at the SFA have just shown themsellves to be the bunch of clowns that they really are. Tweeting (and the use of) which they critize players about is now their official medium???? As has been said many times it is a simple case of just following the paperwork. All the SFA has to do is get the paperwork that shows the English FA closed out the suspension. No ifs or buts (or tweets) just show the paperwork and case closed. Strewth can you imagine if this lot ran our national game. Oh sh*t they do!!!!

 

From BBC web-site

 

The SFA tweeted on Tuesday: "One match League Cup suspension notified to FA, as per FIFA regs, when player moved to Liverpool in 2010."

 

It pointed out that Wilson served his ban at the beginning of season 2010/11.

 

"FA does not operate competition-specific disciplinary procedures, so suspension served in first match of 2010/11 (Liverpool v Arsenal)," added the SFA in a subsequent tweet.

 

"No outstanding suspension notified to Scottish FA when player returned to Scotland, so he was eligible to play in League Cup semi-final." (I guess by another tweet)

http://www.scottishfa.co.uk/resources/documents/Disciplinary/CurrentSuspensions/Season2009/10/May2010/PlayerSuspensions/LOS45(27May).pdf

 

In the above link go to page 5. This shows that on the 27th May 2010 the SFA recognised that Daniel Wilson had a one match suspension to serve in the League Cup.

 

http://www.scottishfa.co.uk/resources/documents/Disciplinary/CurrentSuspensions/Season2010/11/July2010/PlayerSuspensions/LOS01(23-JUL).pdf

 

The next link is from the 23rd July 2010 in which going to page 4, Daniel Wilson no longer appears to be banned for one match in this competition by the SFA.

 

Therefore the SFA have recognised by the 23rd July 2010 that his ban has been served. Today they have stated that it was served in a Liverpool v Arsenal tie on the 14th August of the same year, how can this possibly be the case then if they had already removed the ban prior to this date?!

 

This is not any paper or press talk, these links are taken from the SFA's own website. They now have another question to answer to; I hope the club are seeing this and taking note.

Where's "Deep throat" when you need him?

http://www.scottishfa.co.uk/resources/documents/Disciplinary/CurrentSuspensions/Season2009/10/May2010/PlayerSuspensions/LOS45(27May).pdf

 

In the above link go to page 5. This shows that on the 27th May 2010 the SFA recognised that Daniel Wilson had a one match suspension to serve in the League Cup.

 

http://www.scottishfa.co.uk/resources/documents/Disciplinary/CurrentSuspensions/Season2010/11/July2010/PlayerSuspensions/LOS01(23-JUL).pdf

 

The next link is from the 23rd July 2010 in which going to page 4, Daniel Wilson no longer appears to be banned for one match in this competition by the SFA.

 

Therefore the SFA have recognised by the 23rd July 2010 that his ban has been served. Today they have stated that it was served in a Liverpool v Arsenal tie on the 14th August of the same year, how can this possibly be the case then if they had already removed the ban prior to this date?!

 

This is not any paper or press talk, these links are taken from the SFA's own website. They now have another question to answer to; I hope the club are seeing this and taking note.

 

When did he sign for Liverpool? If he was registered by Liverpool by then he would not appear on a SFA suspension list as he was registered by the FA.