DAFC.net Forum

Forum List | Football Forum

1 -- 2 -- 3 -- 4 -- 5 -- 6 -- 7 -- 8 -- [ 9 ] -- 10 -- 11 -- 12 --

Topic: Hamilton Could be docked points update - docked -15 points
161. Author: Lambo1885 Date: Fri 18th Apr 2025. 15:21 wee eck, Fri 18 Apr 14:41 I think some posters are missing the point if they think Hamilton`s punishment is a lucky break for us and other teams involved in the relegation battle. Charge 1 against them states they misled the SPFL regarding the lifting of a transfer embargo. It`s fair to assume this should have been in force during the January transfer window when they brought 5 players to the club including Ricky Lamie, Scott Robinson, Connor Smith and Charlie Telfer. It could also have affected earlier transfers. The reason for the points deduction is to compensate for the fact that they were probably fielding a stronger team than they were entitled to in games and winning points they would likely not have won otherwise. The penalty is obviously an estimate but the SPFL have deemed that, in relation to this charge, a loss equivalent to 4 wins is appropriate. Rather than `losing` 12 points, they are saying their points total was artificially inflated by that amount as a result of flouting the rules. [Charge 1: Breach of Rules B1, E17 and E18 in relation to the failure to notify the SPFL of Remuneration Defaults in respect of six players and a failure to act with the utmost good faith in its representations to the SPFL Board regarding the lifting of a transfer embargo after previous Remuneration and Tax Defaults. Sanction: Immediate 12 point deduction and £5,000 fine.] ETA - Sorry, I see PARrot has made this point much more concisely whilst I was composing my post! Scott Robinson scored what was effectively their winner last weekend. Reply
162. Author: Jeffery Date: Fri 18th Apr 2025. 15:32 He and Ricky Lamie also scored the goals as they beat QP in February. Reply
163. Author: DunfyDave Date: Fri 18th Apr 2025. 15:32 Rigger Al, Fri 18 Apr 12:13 Lets get the points on our own merit ,3 wins please :):) ^^^^ Spot-On Rigger It would leave a much sweeter taste in everyone`s mouth if we can get maximum`ish points from our three remaining games and hush any hint that we were "bailed out" or "saved" by the Accie`s sad saga. DunfyDave Reply
164. Author: wee eck Date: Fri 18th Apr 2025. 15:35 I think Scott Robinson has been a regular starter and Charlie Telfer a starter or a sub. Connor Smith was a regular starter too when he first joined but seems to have disappeared recently so he may be injured. Lamie hasn`t featured much but he was a late sub on Saturday. Reply
165. Author: red-star-par Date: Fri 18th Apr 2025. 17:02 Scott Robinson is a right good player, I said when they signed him that was the sort we needed in midfield Reply
166. Author: wee eck Date: Fri 18th Apr 2025. 18:16 The Robinson deal was a strange one, exchanging Scott Martin, a regular Hamilton starter. I recall Robinson saying Hamilton offered a longer deal than he had at Partick. I`ve just read that Robinson, Oli Shaw and Connor Smith all have deals until 2027! Reply
167. Author: Par-timer Date: Fri 18th Apr 2025. 19:05 Hamilton will surely appeal this, given that the twelve point element seems to be a guesstimate rather than a standard punishment (like the three point element is, or the fifteen point administration deductions for ICT and Dumbarton were). The SFA won’t overturn it, but by going high they have given themselves the option of reducing the 12 point element (by half, as the English FA has done in certain cases recently) if on appeal substantial mitigations are put forward and still having a substantial punishment. Even if this were to happen, the punishment makes a massive difference to our own position, but a reduction in the punishment would potentially mean a real dogfight between Airdrie and Hamilton. Reply
168. Author: McCaig`s Tower Date: Fri 18th Apr 2025. 22:00 I was struck by the disparity between the relatively minor nature of the fines, and the severity of the points deductions. Is this because the fines are for administrative failings, but the points deductions are for far more serious breaches? I guess having hit Bonnyrigg hard they had to be seen to be consistent, but is there sentencing guidance on penalties for financial irregularities? I think when we were deducted 15 points it was a relatively arbitrary amount, the intention being to make it hard but not impossible to avoid relegation. I think the authorities have codified things since. I wouldn`t be surprised if there were considerations that 12+3 would likely be appealed and the SPFL would settle for 6+3. It is clearly unsatisfactory to have such doubt late into the season. It`s an interesting idea to regard players signed as being ineligible and award 3-0 wins by default. I think Accies have won 14 points since the closure of the window but I haven`t checked whether the potentially ineligible players played. Such a sanction can seem a little unfair, as some teams could get points they may not have deserved. We could also get into a long debate about improper registrations. I see Accies say they are appealing - but the league table hasn`t been unupdated... Reply
169. Author: Socks Date: Fri 18th Apr 2025. 23:41 On a quick read of the SPFL rules (J22 to J25), it looks like the appeal is to the SFA, rather than the SPFL. The SFA judicial panel rules say that it can deal with an appeal against a decision of a recognised football body (the SPFL). The judicial panel rules say that the appeal has to be lodged within 5 working days of the club receiving the decision, so presumably by end of next week at the latest, assuming written reasons received last night or today. Appeal tribunal then sets the date of appeal hearing. Given where we are in the season, presumably it`ll be arranged quickly once the appeal is received. However, if Hamilton try to draw it out and leave submitting their appeal til near the end of next week, that likely means the appeal hearing will not be until the last week of the season which would not be great. If the appeal goes in early, maybe it could be heard next week. I don`t think the league table could be unupdated yet. The SFA rules only allow for the sanction to be suspended once the appeal is formally received. Even then, the SPFL would have the right to ask for it not to be suspended. That all seems about procedure rather than outcome and it might be that everyone just agrees to get on with it to come to a quick decision. Reply
170. Author: McCaig`s Tower Date: Sat 19th Apr 2025. 00:09 Do you think they`ll send their appeal by post?? Reply
171. Author: Rigger Al Date: Sat 19th Apr 2025. 00:23 There is a chance this can be oer ruled by appeal,So we need to continue as if they have the points before.And win the points we need Reply
172. Author: da_no_1 Date: Sat 19th Apr 2025. 00:37 I agree but it won`t be overruled "Some days will stay a 1000 years, some pass like the flash of a spark" Reply
173. Author: GG Riva Date: Sat 19th Apr 2025. 06:56 Rigger Al, Sat 19 Apr 00:23 There is a chance this can be oer ruled by appeal,So we need to continue as if they have the points before.And win the points we need Never say never, but the SPFL has not docked Accies 15 pts on a whim. It appears that those running the club informed the SPFL that its finances were in order to have the transfer embargo imposed lifted, at a time when a number of players had not been paid. If this is the case, they don`t have a leg to stand on. The SFA may decide the punishment is overly harsh and reduce the points deduction, but I don`t see how it can be completely quashed. Not your average Sunday League player. Reply
174. Author: shottslass Date: Sat 19th Apr 2025. 09:52 A small group of Accies fans met with board members yesterday. The board are confident their appeal will be dealt with favourably (but they have to say that). The appeal date has been pencilled in for Wednesday 30th April - 2 days before the end of the league season. My husband is an Accies fan so this has been a crazy week to say the least. Reply
175. Author: wee eck Date: Sat 19th Apr 2025. 09:55 According to the Sun the club is due over £500k for rent on New Douglas Park which is owned by a company controlled by the previous owner of the club. Reply
176. Author: shottslass Date: Sat 19th Apr 2025. 10:01 The stadium is owned by Colin McGowan - he previously owned both the stadium and the football club and he was involved years ago at Raith Rovers. If local rumours are to be believed, he’s been charging the football club in excess of £30k per match for rent. The footballing side’s only source of income is match day revenues, so it’s clearly an unsustainable model. I think the clubs only chance is a someone riding in on a white horse to save them, but McGowan isn’t going to part with the stadium, so who would want to buy only the football club? It’s sad times for one of the country’s oldest clubs. Reply
177. Author: GG Riva Date: Sat 19th Apr 2025. 10:16 shottslass, Sat 19 Apr 10:01 The stadium is owned by Colin McGowan - he previously owned both the stadium and the football club and he was involved years ago at Raith Rovers. If local rumours are to be believed, he’s been charging the football club in excess of £30k per match for rent. The footballing side’s only source of income is match day revenues, so it’s clearly an unsustainable model. I think the clubs only chance is a someone riding in on a white horse to save them, but McGowan isn’t going to part with the stadium, so who would want to buy only the football club? It’s sad times for one of the country’s oldest clubs. That`s shocking. A club with such a long history being screwed by an unscrupulous stadium owner. You have to wonder why those running the club agreed to such an exorbitant rent. It doesn`t take an Einstein to work out that it`s unsustainable, given the club`s modest income. Not your average Sunday League player. Reply
178. Author: kozmasrightfoot Date: Sat 19th Apr 2025. 12:57 I`m not going to give an opinion on whether or not the points deduction will be lowered (the decision defo won`t be reversed though, that main charge shows how naughty they`ve been), because I`ll just jinx it. 3 points today please. Pars fan. Magpies fan. Mens tennis fan. Alternative rock fan. Not a fan of much else. Reply
179. Author: par-ticular Date: Sat 19th Apr 2025. 16:03 Shades of Third Lanark here! Followed the HiHi as a lad. Authorities allowed him to destroy the club. Hope they don’t go same way because of someone’s grievances! Reply
180. Author: Par Dan Date: Sat 19th Apr 2025. 16:30 This will put Hamilton out the game so hopefully their appeal is successful. Reply

1 -- 2 -- 3 -- 4 -- 5 -- 6 -- 7 -- 8 -- [ 9 ] -- 10 -- 11 -- 12 --

Post your Reply

Your Message:

By using your account you have implicitly accepted the DAFC.net Forum Rules and agree to be bound by them. You also agree that you will take sole responsibility for your post and indemnify dafc.net on all matters and costs. Refrain from making any potentially libelous comments about anyone

- - -