Sunderland field Ineligible player

[West Acton]

Dealt with quietly by the prem league and their fined

We fielded an Ineligible player and it's breaking news on the back pages with threats of points deductions and legal cases from others in the league

An example of how two clubs can be portrayed so differently

[Greg1882]

Probably got away with it lighter as they informed the fa themselves

[QPRDave]

Dealt with quietly by the prem league and their fined

We fielded an Ineligible player and it's breaking news on the back pages with threats of points deductions and legal cases from others in the league

An example of how two clubs can be portrayed so differently

Good point west.....Sunderland aren't as newsworthy as QPR ...obviously

[QPRDave]

Probably got away with it lighter as they informed the fa themselves

I thought we did too.

[QPR1976]

I thought we did too.

We did, as soon as the Football League changed their rules on 3rd party ownership mid season (Sept or Oct ?)

Worth noting Sunderland Drew 1 and Lost 3 of the 4 Premiership games their lad played in. And beat MK Dons in the League/Capital Cup 3rd round in which they went on a run to the Semis. So they profited by a point and Southampton & MK Dons potentially lost out. (Not bothered about the franchise lot tbf)

[Greg1882]

I thought we did too.

Couldn't remember if we did or not mate but in that case it does seem a bit double standards

[Hertford Hoop]

FA probably thought they would go down anyway, imagine a long drawn out saga like ours if they had been deducted.

[West Acton]

Also they are dealt with by the league they play in and we got dealt with by the FA no consistency

[West London is Rss]

This is so true.. anything to do with us and its fvcking back page news

[QPRMad]

In fairness, they were fined because they failed to gain international clearance for him after a loan spell in Germany as they did not realise they needed to get international clearance for a second time.
I'm not at all an expert, but this maybe seems a little more innocuous than our case, although I feel as a club we are disliked by the media.

[Hitman34]

am happy they never got points deducted, dont want to give foolham any hope.

[Lunar Jetman]

Poyet should follow his own standards...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2596711/Sunderland-boss-Gus-Poyet-demanded-three-points-awarded-opposition-ineligible-player-appeared-against-Brighton-2010.html

At the time, the Uruguayan said in an interview with Brighton's official website: 'I am sure Hartlepool did not realise he was suspended. It was not a case of cheating, but they made a mistake and that player should not have been on the pitch so the three points should go to the opposition.

'They cannot just deduct the points from Hartlepool. For the sake of fair competition we should be awarded them.

'All teams play 46 games in a season so it would be unfair if we only played 45 matches. The Football League has to be careful with the decision they make.

'It does not matter if they did it with intention or not, the only decision they can make in this instance - and I would say the same if my team were the guilty party - is to give the three points to the opposition.'

That said, they'd only lose one point as they drew 1 and lost 3 of the games...

[QPRDave]

am happy they never got points deducted, dont want to give foolham any hope.

Aaah I really must think through my posts before complaining!!