Re: Non-League Football again : Fri Mar 19, 2010 2:12 pm  

Codarmysaint wrote:

The same Chelsea who can afford whoever they want.

If your trying to compare yourself to a wealthy team then surely your QPR. Not in the top tier of your respective league structure and taking players from the division above by overpaying players.

Re: Non-League Football again : Fri Mar 19, 2010 2:25 pm  

Codarmysaint wrote:

The same Chelsea who can afford whoever they want.

There's a difference between "being able to afford" and "being able to pay for".

I could probably find a way to "pay" for a flash sports car. Whether I could "afford" it is a completely different animal.

Again, what happens if (heaven forbid) Andy Piley gets hit by a tram on the way home from work tonight? Where does this leave Fleetwood tomorrow morning? I'm guessing, not in a good place.

Re: Non-League Football again : Fri Mar 19, 2010 2:41 pm  

Bottom of the league on saturday. Should be an easy win for the cod army. Just gotta hope Southport slip up.

Re: Non-League Football again : Fri Mar 19, 2010 2:45 pm  

Codarmysaint wrote:

Bottom of the league on saturday. Should be an easy win for the cod army. Just gotta hope Southport slip up.

As easy as it was early in the season?

Re: Non-League Football again : Fri Mar 19, 2010 2:53 pm  

El Pac Carnegie wrote:

As easy as it was early in the season?

This time round it will be. Im going for a 4-1 win. BSN's number 1 striker, Adam Warlow with a hattrick and the ex manchester united reserve team player, Jamie Mullan with the 4th.

Re: Non-League Football again : Fri Mar 19, 2010 8:02 pm  

tommy wrote:

Apparently Fleetwood want to appeal the Farsley Celtic results being expunged...good luck with that

To quote my self , York City and 9 others have appealed about chesters result. The reason I find it crazy is because the conference are to stupid to change it or think of the right way to deal with these situations. It is, unfortunatly, chasing a lost course.

However, each club is spot on with their appeal, ive said from day 1 its a joke.

Re: Non-League Football again : Fri Mar 19, 2010 8:50 pm  

tommy wrote:

To quote my self , York City and 9 others have appealed about chesters result. The reason I find it crazy is because the conference are to stupid to change it or think of the right way to deal with these situations. It is, unfortunatly, chasing a lost course.

However, each club is spot on with their appeal, ive said from day 1 its a joke.

What else would you do? There is no other way to deal with it unfortunately. Apart from doing some sort of check before the season begins to ensure clubs can get through it. You can't award teams wins as goal difference may come into it and obviously you can't have teams playing different amounts of games throughout the season. I'm a York fan and even though its hindered us i think the right thing has been done.

Re: Non-League Football again : Fri Mar 19, 2010 10:23 pm  

El Pac Carnegie wrote:

What else would you do? There is no other way to deal with it unfortunately. Apart from doing some sort of check before the season begins to ensure clubs can get through it. You can't award teams wins as goal difference may come into it and obviously you can't have teams playing different amounts of games throughout the season. I'm a York fan and even though its hindered us i think the right thing has been done.

So why are bookings received during the game still standing? We've lost players to suspension because of bookings picked up against Farsley.

Its because the league dont like us thats why

Re: Non-League Football again : Fri Mar 19, 2010 10:38 pm  

Bookings, suspensions, bonuses, league points gained fairly etc. There's to many things that HAVE happend to just turn around and go...'meh, it never happend, lets just pretend they were never here'.

Fleetwood as i understand were 7 points at the top having fairly beaten a Farsley team that turned up for a game of football twice, but are now 1 point at the top. Same with City, we gained 3 point from one game vs Chester, Luton got 2 from 2 games, both fairly played against a team willing to play their best. And we lose out on 4 points. Its just silly that's all. 2 points to each team who hasnt played them and no effect on the goal difference would be fair(er) for me.

Re: Non-League Football again : Sat Mar 20, 2010 12:04 am  

tommy wrote:

Bookings, suspensions, bonuses, league points gained fairly etc. There's to many things that HAVE happend to just turn around and go...'meh, it never happend, lets just pretend they were never here'.

Fleetwood as i understand were 7 points at the top having fairly beaten a Farsley team that turned up for a game of football twice, but are now 1 point at the top. Same with City, we gained 3 point from one game vs Chester, Luton got 2 from 2 games, both fairly played against a team willing to play their best. And we lose out on 4 points. Its just silly that's all. 2 points to each team who hasnt played them and no effect on the goal difference would be fair(er) for me.

You can't do that though. It isn't fair on the teams who are left to play the team that's been expunged. Both ends of the table are tight so it isn't fair to have these unplayed games declared as any result. All this moaning about the teams having to pay these bonuses etc. doesn't wash with me. They still got a crowd through the turnstiles. The bookings things is the only grey area in my opinion. The precedent has been set that the results should be expunged.

I'm confused as to why at least 4 of these 10 clubs in the BSP vote to send Chester packing when they knew that the standard thing to do is expunge results?

Codarmysaint get over yourself. There are another 21 clubs that are affected by Farsley going under. They will all be treated the same as yourself. I would of thought a club of your stature should be in a similar to position to Newport County? What with your league players and top class stadia.