FuzzyBear Posted December 17, 2015 Author Share Posted December 17, 2015 Replay confirmed for 7.30 on Tuesday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mozam76 Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 Looking forward to heading along for the replay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rab B Nesbit Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 Great effort to go up there and get a result with 11 fit players. You'd think we'd now be able to do the business at home in front of a big crowd with the travel situation reversed. We were hoping so too in round 1 having gone up there and earned a replay but were well beaten at home. Looking forward to the replay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auld Heid Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 We were hoping so too in round 1 having gone up there and earned a replay but were well beaten at home. Looking forward to the replay. Hopefully the players who were around at the Devronvale replay will let their colleagues this is no forgone conclusion. Not sure how similar our circumstances are to Whitehill as a number of key players back available who didn't travel - plus will Wick struggle like ourselves for numbers mid-week. (Will Morag even let Dougal away from the croft to come down south during the week!!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wingnut Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 Might no be a game,wickers are shouting about sub rules etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FuzzyBear Posted December 17, 2015 Author Share Posted December 17, 2015 As far as I know the penalty for not having enough subs is a fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wingnut Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 So I heard Fuzzy but they'll be up there like a lynch mob wanting us out and save themselves the trip down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FuzzyBear Posted December 17, 2015 Author Share Posted December 17, 2015 Where is Hibbee Jibbee when you need him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CM. Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 I take it this is a rule only enforced in the cup (if it even is a rule)? There have been numerous Clyde league games in the past where either us or the opposition haven't managed to fulfil a subs bench and I've not heard anything about it being against the rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HTG Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 Where is Hibbee Jibbee when you need him. His stuff about rules is all bluff and bluster lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auld Heid Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 14. Number of Players and Substitutes Except for the circumstances described within Rule 22(a), a team shall consist of eleven players and is permitted to list a minimum of 5 substitutes up to a maximum of 7, of whom not more than 3 may take part in the match. The team list must include 2 recognised goalkeepers, one of whom must be named as a substitute. The players in a team may be changed from match to match, but a club may not play, or list as a named substitute, any player who, in the same season, has already played, or been a named substitute, for another club in the Competition. (Rule 34.1 (b) refers). Would seem at face value that Wick have a grounds for a protest but unlikely to be viewed grounds for removing a team from the competition. The mostly likely outcome is a fine or slap on the wrist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FuzzyBear Posted December 17, 2015 Author Share Posted December 17, 2015 The rule is not worded very well. Having the word permitted followed by minimum seems strange. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auld Heid Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 The rule is not worded very well. Having the word permitted followed by minimum seems strange. A lot of SFA rules are ambiguous to allow them to make broad interpretations when deciding on such matters. Given the circumstances yesterday and knowing we were struggling for numbers - it goes without saying that contact would have been made with the SFA for clarity before submitting the team sheet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HibeeJibee Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 Someone actually floated this issue during the week in the thread in the Junior sub-forum. It occurred to me last night, as soon as I saw their teamlines tweeted... but I didn't want to mention it for fear of the Rose fans throwing their toys out of the pram. I don't imagine it will lead to anything worse than a warning or fine but by the same token I don't think it says anywhere that the players must be present? Could just have listed a couple of non-travellers. There have been cases where players were listed and turned-up late during games. Incidentally, good to see the replay confirmed for Tuesday, if right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auld Heid Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 Someone actually floated this issue during the week in the thread in the Junior sub-forum. It occurred to me last night, as soon as I saw their teamlines tweeted... but I didn't want to mention it for fear of the Rose fans throwing their toys out of the pram. I don't imagine it will lead to anything worse than a warning or fine but by the same token I don't think it says anywhere that the players must be present? Could just have listed a couple of non-travellers. There have been cases where players were listed and turned-up late during games. Incidentally, good to see the replay confirmed for Tuesday, if right. Excellent point - it does seems very much an avoidable error for doing something as simple as what you suggest. An error which could be very costly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cardinal Richelieu Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 14. Number of Players and Substitutes Except for the circumstances described within Rule 22(a), a team shall consist of eleven players and is permitted to list a minimum of 5 substitutes up to a maximum of 7, of whom not more than 3 may take part in the match. The team list must include 2 recognised goalkeepers, one of whom must be named as a substitute. The players in a team may be changed from match to match, but a club may not play, or list as a named substitute, any player who, in the same season, has already played, or been a named substitute, for another club in the Competition. (Rule 34.1 (b) refers). Would seem at face value that Wick have a grounds for a protest but unlikely to be viewed grounds for removing a team from the competition. The mostly likely outcome is a fine or slap on the wrist. (1 minute 22s) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poet of the Macabre Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 Seems like a lot of effort just to get pumped off Forfar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HTG Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 See all of the stuff we've had for weeks about "that's the rules". Well this just sums up why rules need to be challenged. Linlithgow name 3 subs and get a sternly worded letter - or even a fine - for not naming 5 subs. Linlithgow name 5 subs for a game in wick, 3 of whom are watching Eastenders 250 miles away from the pitch - no problem. Rules adhered to. Difference in outcome, absolutely fuckin zero but you save hassle with the lie. Monty Python right enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baker2 Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 Seems like a lot of effort just to get pumped off Forfar.pumpec off Forfar!!! Haha fecking stop it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zen Archer (Raconteur) Posted December 17, 2015 Share Posted December 17, 2015 pumpec off Forfar!!! Haha fecking stop it! Is that an oil rig? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.