Remove this Banner Ad

SFL Div One 2013

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sooooo what's everyone's opinion on teams that play unregistered players?

Depends on the situation e.g. reserves/thirds extremely short on players had to get a ringin that may not have been cleared from a previous club.

Other than that there should be no reason to play unregistered players.

Happen against you this weekend JAM?
 
If the player has a clearance in progress, but it hasn't been completed, he is still eligible to play if the club he is leaving has either approved it at their end in Footyweb, or put down in writing that the player is free to play.

If he has no clearance started, and he has played, the club should lose the 4 points.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Again, if it has been approved by the departed club in Footyweb (you won't be able to see this unless you are the club secretary/registrar) or you have written approval from the club, it's all good.

If that's the case, he can't be put on the team sheet or the internet results as his data will still be linked to his previous club.
 
The easiest way to clear it up would be to give Matt Duck a call. He will be able to see if there has been any approval or correspondence between the clubs.
 
Again, if it has been approved by the departed club in Footyweb (you won't be able to see this unless you are the club secretary/registrar) or you have written approval from the club, it's all good.

If that's the case, he can't be put on the team sheet or the internet results as his data will still be linked to his previous club.

Don't agree. If a player can't be put on a team sheet for any reason surely he cannot be eligible to play. What happens if he belts somebody and needs to be reported?? Or like many leagues where there are points systems in place that are calculated by the players listed on team sheets?
 

Remove this Banner Ad

So with Clayton losing their 4 pts this week, it just goes to show you it is not worth playing any player that is not cleared
Maybe a bit of Karma. With a couple of clubs struggling financially and with player numbers in Divvy 1 this year it seems a little unjust that Clayton can be bailed out of a Financial mess by being gifted Divvy 1 finals and now it appears they are topping up their list with more paid players.
 
Lets be honest, maybe if Labour were re elected back in 2010 in the state election, there's a strong possibility that Division 1 finals would be being played at a newly refurbished Linton St oval this year. Just saying.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

So with Clayton losing their 4 pts this week, it just goes to show you it is not worth playing any player that is not cleared


Just seemed a bit silly really. I mean, if we're all honest, in days gone buy, every club has played a "bodgy" or "ring-in" under someone else's name in the 2's etc. if they were short on numbers or had a clearance not come through. But to do it in 1st Div Seniors, with a player that is relatively well known, in front of Puppet, who pretty much knows every player in Victoria, was (to borrow a line from Bob Murphy) a bit Rascally. Not to mention the fact that a few of us were contacted about it before and after the game was over. If we left it unreported & it went unpunished it may have opened a little can of worms.

Lesson learnt I'd hope.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top