[spireitematt]

The Daniel Jones suspension is a bit of a grey area. Seeing as the MK Dons match is classed as void wouldn't Jones suspension started last week against Bradford? Which means his three match ban will be over after the Peterborough game on Boxing day. Morsy should be available for the MK Dons replay.

I listened to BBC Sheffield Football Heaven last night and Andy Giddings said that the FA wanted to have the game played next week around the 22nd/23rd of December but the MK Police said it wasn't possible. So the FA chose 2nd Jan a Friday night game which punishes the fans.

Couldn't they have just play the replay behind closed doors next week and broadcast it on a stream or on BBC?

What the FA should have done is play the replay on the 3rd Jan when the 3rd rounds are playing and then play the 3rd round match against Worcester or Scunny on the night of the 3rd round replays, its not difficult is it but the FA have to bugger it around which means it doesn't affect MK Dons and us but affects Scunny and Worcester as well because whoever wins in the replay and wins in the replay between Scunny and Worcester won't get the £12.5k from appearing on BBC's Final score.

Looking at it its become an absolute farce and probably would have been easier for us to have been kicked out because we are bloody bloody lucky to still be in the competition. Non-league teams and fans are really not liking the fact that we've got a replay as teams in the past have been kicked out for fielding an ineligible player, but instead of hating on Chesterfield they should be hating on the FA for not being consistent enough in there rules.

The FA need to change the rules where no loan players are allowed to be played in any cup competitions or if any team plays an ineligible player in any cup competition then they are kicked out.

Hypothetically lets say that Chelsea loaned out 14 players to Huddersfield and Huddersfield were drawn in the FA Cup to Chelsea and Huddersfield had 20 players in the first team and Chelsea said to them you can't play any of the 14 loan players against us in the FA Cup we won't allow it, so Huddersfield have 6 eligible players to play against Chelsea. Do they play 5 youth players? and end up getting fined for bringing the game into disrepute.

[Devongone]

Can't argue with that Matt.

Chelsea could win the league by loaning players out to clubs who might then take points off their title rivals.

Rules that don't work in anyone's favour need to be scrapped. Karl Robinson is quite right. Whatever the result their season is likely to suffer. Their only good scenario is to beat us easily, go on to beat Scunny/Worcester first time without too much effort and pull a big name out of the next hat. Losing a tough game to us, replays against Scunny, a bit of bad weather and with MKD's small squad suddenly their promotion journey could be coming off the rails through no fault of their own - having behaved absolutely admirably.

[spireitematt]

MK Dons don't want the match because they want to get promotion and get out of League 1, so they don't want to get injuries or suspensions in this replay. We don't want this match because its like groundhog day, got to go to Stadium MK again and play the match all over again and our players and fans must feel so disheartened especially Armand as he got the winner and now his goal has been ruled out.

If we lose the replay then the clerical error will have cost the club money which could be used in the transfer market for a new player/s.

In the words of Alf Ramsey "You've beaten them once. Now go out and bloody beat them again."

Whatever happens MK or us will face Scunthorpe in the fourth round because Scunthorpe beat Worcester on penalties after drawing 1-1 after ET.

[spireitematt]

Apparently Scunthorpe are selling FA Cup 3rd round tickets for 6th January.

[spireitematt]

Just read that this isn't the first time this has happened.

Back in 1972 Chesterfield played Blackburn away in the league and won but Chesterfield played a keeper called Jim Brown and his registration was posted around Xmas and didn't arrive in time and both teams were forced to play a replay which Chesterfield won 1-0 the goal was scored by a player called Jackie Sinclair.

Ring any bells Devon?

[Devongone]

I don't remember it at all really ........

Our highest ever home attendance was agaianst Blackburn. I remember Jim Brown, crowd loved him, but I thought he was too small. I was 19, Christmas 1972, going off to college, playing football and rugby several times a week, so I didn't get to many games at that time .......... The Christmas post thing rings more bells and I think stuff happened to several clubs at that time.

Great research Matt, even oldies have forgotten. Maybe the Pooch still has the relevant brain cell intact.

[spireitematt]

THE FA CHALLENGE CUP
SECOND ROUND PROPER
MILTON KEYNES DONS v CHESTERFIELD
SATURDAY 6 DECEMBER 2014
THE FA CHALLENGE CUP
SUB-COMMITTEE MEETING
HELD AT THE FA OFFICES
WEMBLEY STADIUM, LONDON, HA9 0WS
ON MONDAY 15 DECEMBER 2014
COMMENCING AT 12.00PM

Present: Messrs Andy Ambler (in the Chair), Keith Lamb and Jeff Mostyn
Messrs Steve Clark, Chris Darnell representing The FA Competitions Department

Chris Turner, Sally Swain, Paul Cook and Graham Bean representing Chesterfield FC

Purpose of Hearing
To adjudicate on the Second Round Proper tie, Milton Keynes Dons v Chesterfield, played at Milton Keynes Dons on Saturday 6 December 2014, following a charge issued against Chesterfield in relation to the eligibility of Georg Margreitter, who played in the tie for Chesterfield without being correctly qualified in accordance with FA Challenge Cup Rule 15(j).

In accordance with FA Challenge Cup Competition Rule 16(a), the Professional Game Board shall have the power to call upon a player, and/or the Club to which he is registered, or for which he played, to prove that the player is qualified according to the Competition Rules. Pursuant to Rule 1(d) of the Rules of The FA Challenge Cup, and under the provisions of Rule 1(g), the Sub Committee has the power to exercise all powers of the Professional Game Board of The FA in relation to this matter.

In addition, pursuant to Rule 16(b), where an ineligible player plays for a Club in a Competition match, the Professional Game Board shall remove the Club from the Competition, and may impose further penalties against the Club.

And subject to Rule 16©, where the Club satisfies the Professional Game Board that the Club (or any of its officers) did not know and could not reasonably have known, even had it made every reasonable enquiry (with the exercise of the utmost caution), that the player was ineligible, the Club shall not be removed from the Competition but may still be subject to any other penalty (e.g. fine, ordered to replay the match).

Having given careful consideration to the submissions of Chesterfield, The FA Challenge Cup Sub-Committee made the following findings of fact and on the basis of those findings reached its decision.

Findings of Fact
1. That Georg Margreitter was named on the Chesterfield Team Sheet and Match Report Form as playing at number 29 in the Second Round Proper against Milton Keynes Dons on Saturday 6 December 2014.

2. That the matter came to the attention of The FA by phone call notification from Chesterfield received on Monday 8 December 2014.

3. That Georg Margreitter was on emergency loan to Chesterfield from Wolverhampton Wanderers, for the period of 12 September 2014 to 13 December 2014 inclusive.

4. That written permission was given for the player to play in The FA Cup by Wolverhampton Wanderers to Chesterfield via text message on Monday 1 December 2014 prior to the 12 noon deadline for the 2nd Rd Proper on Friday 5 December 2014.

5. That a copy of the written permission was not received by The FA by the 12 noon deadline for the 2nd Rd Proper on Friday 5 December 2014 meaning that Georg Margreitter was not correctly registered in accordance with FA Cup Rule 15(j) and was therefore not eligible to play in the tie on Saturday 6 December 2014 for Chesterfield.

6. That on Monday 1 December 2014 and Friday 5 December 2014, The FA sent a notification by email to all clubs in the Second Round Proper, including Chesterfield, reminding all clubs (in bold, large-font capitals) that:

CLUBS MUST ENSURE THAT ALL PLAYERS ARE ELIGIBLE TO PLAY IN THE COMPETITION BY CHECKING THEY ARE NOT UNDER SUSPENSION AND TO MAKE SURE THEY ARE CORRECTLY REGISTERED IN ACCORDANCE WITH COMPETITION RULE 15

Decision
1. On the Second Round Proper tie, Milton Keynes Dons v Chesterfield, played at Milton Keynes Dons on Saturday 6 December 2014, following a charge issued against Chesterfield, in relation to the eligibility of Georg Margreitter who played in the tie for Chesterfield without being correctly qualified in accordance with FA Challenge Cup Rule 15(j).

2. The Sub-Committee noted that pursuant to FA Challenge Cup Rule 16(a) they had the power to call upon a player, and/or the Club to which he is registered, or for which he played, to prove that the player was qualified according to the Competition Rules.
In addition, pursuant to Rule 1(d):
“take such action and make such decisions, orders, rulings and impose such penalties as it deems necessary and following such procedures as it considers appropriate and such shall, subject to Rule 31, be final and binding on all Participants.”
And, additionally pursuant to Rule 1(g):
“in addition to any other action or penalty, the Professional Game Board shall have the power to disqualify any competing Club, or Player for any competing Club(s), which it determines to have breached the Rules of The Association or the Competition Rules (and any rules or regulations issued pursuant to the Competition Rules), and the decision of the Professional Game Board shall be final and binding.”
And, that this position is reinforced by the provisions of FA Challenge Cup Rule 16(b):
“subject to Rule 16© below, where an ineligible player plays for a Club in a Competition match, the Professional Game Board shall remove the Club from the Competition, and may impose further penalties against the Club.”
“however, where the Club satisfies the National Game Board that the Club (or any of its officers) did not know and could not reasonably have known, even had it made every reasonable enquiry (with the exercise of the utmost caution), that the player was ineligible, the Club shall not be removed from the Competition but may still be subject to any other penalty (e.g. fine, ordered to replay the match).

3. The Sub-Committee considered submissions made on behalf of Chesterfield and the grounds of mitigation put forward by Chesterfield that included:
a. that Chesterfield understood the rules relating to The FA Challenge Cup Competition and believed that Georg Margreitter was registered correctly.
b. that, whilst Chesterfield acknowledged that the rules of the Competition had been breached, Chesterfield made a plea for leniency on the grounds that they saw the matter as a technical breach as permission had been granted for the player to play from his loaning club but just not submitted to The FA in accordance with the Competition Rules.
c. that no deliberate intent to deceive or gain advantage had been shown by Chesterfield.
d. that Chesterfield had acted before and during the hearing with honesty, integrity and transparency at all times.
Further to the above, the Sub-Committee concluded that as permission had been provided by Wolverhampton Wanderers to Chesterfield prior to 12 noon on Friday 5 December 2014 and that because Chesterfield did not deliberately act in an underhand way so as to circumvent the rules of the Competition by bringing the matter to the attention of The FA, the Sub-Committee decided that Chesterfield should not be removed from the Competition and ordered the tie to be replayed at Milton Keynes Dons on the earliest available date as directed by The FA.
And, whilst the Sub-Committee were satisfied with the evidence submitted by Chesterfield, the decision to order the tie to be replayed was deemed to be the fairest outcome in this unique situation in order to protect the integrity of the world’s oldest and most prestigious cup competition.

4. Furthermore, Chesterfield were made responsible for the costs of the hearing but no further punishment was awarded as ordering a replay was deemed sufficient punishment.

5. The Sub-Committee noted that the decision of the Sub-Committee was final and binding on all parties.

The meeting ended at 1.45pm

[St Charles Owl]

So after all the time, effort and money spent on this by all the involved parties, we end up back at the start with you guys winning 1-0 and heading to a game against Scunny!!!

[El Car]

Football wins in the end which is the main thing. It was a pretty minor administrative error in the first place and giving the clubs a chance to settle it on the pitch was the most just solution. Compare it to UEFA's decision to award Celtic a 3-0 win over Legia after the Poles had gubbed them 4-1 at Celtic Park (6-1 on aggregate) but fielded a suspended player in the last few minutes because their interpretation of a vague UEFA rule led them to believe his suspension had already been served. No one in Europe thought Celtic deserved to get through that tie, but UEFA wouldn't consider any sort of replay.

In the age of digital databases and instant access, I think that it if football associations want to apply strict regulations with at times draconian punishments then they should themselves be responsible for maintaining a register of who is eligible to play in any given match at any given time. All a club would then have to do is check before kick off that that everyone they put out is fine to play, and any issues arising later are clear cut. It's also ludicrous that so much paperwork has to be processed when a digital form and digital signatures are as legally valid as paper. Football is the only thing keeping the fax machine alive.

[Lord Snooty]

Dead right, El car.