[cite]Posted By: Henry Irving[/cite]
And if if had been AFC nobodies the punishment would have been the same. Why should Wimbledon get a lesser punishment because of their history? We are all quick enough to moan about the "big" teams getting off easy from the FA and UEFA. At non-league level AFC are a "big" team, at least financially.
I am arguing that the punishment is outrageously OTT, not that they should do something special for a bunch of rubbish collectors from a south west london common. I would be arguing the same if it was Bromley, if that makes you feel better.
Rules are rules. Punishments should be commensurate with the scale of the offence. That's the principle that drives justice/natural justice in this country.
I hope they win their appeal.
If the FA decide that the Hamsters have breached eligability rules in respect of Tevez and Mascherano, on the Wombles scale, what would be an appropriate sentence. Bring back hanging for Icelandic Biscuit Manufacturers? Forced amputation of Tevez right leg???
They should be docked points. I'd settle for six or more. The reality is though, they'll bottle it and probably give them a slap across the bank account.
I agree that it does not seem like an attempt to gain an unfair advantage but could not the other sides who have been punished for the same "crime" claim the same. The other sides in the league may well claim that they have been harmed in that they had to follow the rules and would have been punished had they not done so.
With the greatest respect this argument is hogwash.
If this sort of excessive punishment has been meted out before, it was wrong then. Two wrongs don't make a right. Otherwise the mistake will just be perpetuated just because it happened to somebody else. It's excessive and should be reduced to a sensible level now to set a realistic precedent for the future.
worse thing is that if Jermaine had have been booked in his first game then they would have found out the clerical error right away and only lost 3 points but because he is a fair player that doesn't get booked until his sixth game they lost the points from all six plus got kicked out the cup and fined .
Very harsh and as rothko says it makes you believe the FA have something against them .
I know one thing , if MK franchise ever play them in the league then that is gonna be one nasty match
Comments
I am arguing that the punishment is outrageously OTT, not that they should do something special for a bunch of rubbish collectors from a south west london common. I would be arguing the same if it was Bromley, if that makes you feel better.
Rules are rules. Punishments should be commensurate with the scale of the offence. That's the principle that drives justice/natural justice in this country.
I hope they win their appeal.
If the FA decide that the Hamsters have breached eligability rules in respect of Tevez and Mascherano, on the Wombles scale, what would be an appropriate sentence. Bring back hanging for Icelandic Biscuit Manufacturers? Forced amputation of Tevez right leg???
They should be docked points. I'd settle for six or more. The reality is though, they'll bottle it and probably give them a slap across the bank account.
With the greatest respect this argument is hogwash.
If this sort of excessive punishment has been meted out before, it was wrong then. Two wrongs don't make a right. Otherwise the mistake will just be perpetuated just because it happened to somebody else. It's excessive and should be reduced to a sensible level now to set a realistic precedent for the future.
Very harsh and as rothko says it makes you believe the FA have something against them .
I know one thing , if MK franchise ever play them in the league then that is gonna be one nasty match
(Another biased brom fan)
However I consider the punishment to be way, way, over the top for the offence committed.
I think they should be deducted the same number of points as West Ham.