card checks

[best]

On the weekend one club asked for a card check
and found the other team card showed one player was over age .
Does any one know the rules on this matter.
1/ should the game go ahead.
2/ is the over age player allowed to play that game.

[muts]

Confirm that is really what the problem was.
check the competition rules CAREFULLY for yourself.

A couple of years ago Raiders 12 or 13s lost all their points for the season.

[Bomber]

On the weekend one club asked for a card check
and found the other team card showed one player was over age .
Does any one know the rules on this matter.
1/ should the game go ahead.
2/ is the over age player allowed to play that game.

Isnt the whole purpose of the card check is to see that
a) the player is in fact registered with club
b) that he is in the correct age group?

[best]

On the weekend one club asked for a card check
and found the other team card showed one player was over age .
Does any one know the rules on this matter.
1/ should the game go ahead.
2/ is the over age player allowed to play that game.

Isnt the whole purpose of the card check is to see that
a) the player is in fact registered with club
b) that he is in the correct age group?

a/ the player was registered with that club
b/ the card showed he was over aged.


so

1/ should the game go ahead.
2/ is the over age player allowed to play that game

[Nice One Cyril]

On the weekend one club asked for a card check
and found the other team card showed one player was over age .
Does any one know the rules on this matter.
1/ should the game go ahead.
2/ is the over age player allowed to play that game.

Isnt the whole purpose of the card check is to see that
a) the player is in fact registered with club
b) that he is in the correct age group?

a/ the player was registered with that club
b/ the card showed he was over aged.


so

1/ should the game go ahead.
2/ is the over age player allowed to play that game

Yes and No (unless it was a U19s game)

[Stitch This]

Was there an official ref?

If so he should have prevented that player from taking part.

If your team was aware of his age, yet he still played and prior to the match you did not object to his taking part, then there would be unlikely to be any retrospective action.

[God is an Englishman]

Was there an official ref?

If so he should have prevented that player from taking part.

I would disagee with this. It is not the referees job to police the eligibility of players on the pitch. The game would go ahead with whatever players are on the pitch and on the card. The referee would then include the incident in his match report and the league will decide on the appropriate action.

[Rob Lozza]

Was there an official ref?

If so he should have prevented that player from taking part.

I would disagee with this. It is not the referees job to police the eligibility of players on the pitch. The game would go ahead with whatever players are on the pitch and on the card. The referee would then include the incident in his match report and the league will decide on the appropriate action.

Spot on.

[Stitch This]

I would disagee with this. It is not the referees job to police the eligibility of players on the pitch. The game would go ahead with whatever players are on the pitch and on the card. The referee would then include the incident in his match report and the league will decide on the appropriate action.

This would have been a junior game in the FFSA. I think the protocols in regard to card checks are different, though often no one seems to know exactly what they are. My interpretation is that the the FFSA has instructed refs to facilitate, rather than police, card checks between clubs, but most try and avoid getting involved if they can.

[Nice One Cyril]

Was there an official ref?

If so he should have prevented that player from taking part.

I would disagee with this. It is not the referees job to police the eligibility of players on the pitch. The game would go ahead with whatever players are on the pitch and on the card. The referee would then include the incident in his match report and the league will decide on the appropriate action.

So it would be OK with you if the opposition field a hulking great 17 year old against your 14 year old son? What happens if the older kid, who shouldn't be playing, breaks your son's leg? I agree that the referees shouldn't be involved in performing the card check but, if a player is found to be ineligible, they should bar them from taking part. The referee is supposed to be in charge of the game, not the mandarins at the FFSA.

[God is an Englishman]

Was there an official ref?

If so he should have prevented that player from taking part.

I would disagee with this. It is not the referees job to police the eligibility of players on the pitch. The game would go ahead with whatever players are on the pitch and on the card. The referee would then include the incident in his match report and the league will decide on the appropriate action.

So it would be OK with you if the opposition field a hulking great 17 year old against your 14 year old son? What happens if the older kid, who shouldn't be playing, breaks your son's leg? I agree that the referees shouldn't be involved in performing the card check but, if a player is found to be ineligible, they should bar them from taking part. The referee is supposed to be in charge of the game, not the mandarins at the FFSA.

I'm only telling you protocols the referee is supposed to work under. Surely, if it's been found out the opposition coach is going to not allow that player anyway, knowing the they will lose the points and fined etc anyway.

[Cobweb Rides Again]

Whilst it may not be the referees responsibility to check elegibility of the players listed on the match sheet and their player card, if they are advised before a game begins or even during a game that the opposition is playing an ineligible player, they have a moral duty of care as a member of society, regardless of their heirachy directives or rules. Should the above example (broken leg) occur and the referee was made aware of the ineligibility, then they leave themselves open to a possible legal case of negligence.

[God is an Englishman]

Whilst it may not be the referees responsibility to check elegibility of the players listed on the match sheet and their player card, if they are advised before a game begins or even during a game that the opposition is playing an ineligible player, they have a moral duty of care as a member of society, regardless of their heirachy directives or rules. Should the above example (broken leg) occur and the referee was made aware of the ineligibility, then they leave themselves open to a possible legal case of negligence.

what if the other team tells you he's not ineligible?

[Nice One Cyril]

Whilst it may not be the referees responsibility to check elegibility of the players listed on the match sheet and their player card, if they are advised before a game begins or even during a game that the opposition is playing an ineligible player, they have a moral duty of care as a member of society, regardless of their heirachy directives or rules. Should the above example (broken leg) occur and the referee was made aware of the ineligibility, then they leave themselves open to a possible legal case of negligence.

what if the other team tells you he's not ineligible?

I think his player's card might be a bit of a giveaway

[God is an Englishman]

Whilst it may not be the referees responsibility to check elegibility of the players listed on the match sheet and their player card, if they are advised before a game begins or even during a game that the opposition is playing an ineligible player, they have a moral duty of care as a member of society, regardless of their heirachy directives or rules. Should the above example (broken leg) occur and the referee was made aware of the ineligibility, then they leave themselves open to a possible legal case of negligence.

what if the other team tells you he's not ineligible?

I think his player's card might be a bit of a giveaway

I have seen cards with incorrect names, photos on them etc.. Typos happeen you know.

[Nice One Cyril]

what if the other team tells you he's not ineligible?

I think his player's card might be a bit of a giveaway

I have seen cards with incorrect names, photos on them etc.. Typos happeen you know.

Then how would the checking team know he's ineligible in the first place if his details and photo etc say he is?

You're going round in rapidly decreasing circles and will disappear up your own jacksy if you're not careful

[God is an Englishman]

Then how would the checking team know he's ineligible in the first place if his details and photo etc say he is?

You're going round in rapidly decreasing circles and will disappear up your own jacksy if you're not careful

What if there is a typo on the date of birth (seeing as you're talking about over age players. Instead of being born in 94, someone has made a mistake and put 93 on the card. To all who look at the card he's a year older than he actually is.

One I have seen in the amateur league is the name on the card was of a different player. If anyone had known checked his card, the photo wouldn't have matched.

In both scenarios, the opposition would think he was ineligible when in fact he wasn't.

[Nice One Cyril]

Then how would the checking team know he's ineligible in the first place if his details and photo etc say he is?

You're going round in rapidly decreasing circles and will disappear up your own jacksy if you're not careful

What if there is a typo on the date of birth (seeing as you're talking about over age players. Instead of being born in 94, someone has made a mistake and put 93 on the card. To all who look at the card he's a year older than he actually is.

One I have seen in the amateur league is the name on the card was of a different player. If anyone had known checked his card, the photo wouldn't have matched.

In both scenarios, the opposition would think he was ineligible when in fact he wasn't.

Straws and desperate clutching come to mind

[God is an Englishman]

Then how would the checking team know he's ineligible in the first place if his details and photo etc say he is?

You're going round in rapidly decreasing circles and will disappear up your own jacksy if you're not careful

What if there is a typo on the date of birth (seeing as you're talking about over age players. Instead of being born in 94, someone has made a mistake and put 93 on the card. To all who look at the card he's a year older than he actually is.

One I have seen in the amateur league is the name on the card was of a different player. If anyone had known checked his card, the photo wouldn't have matched.

In both scenarios, the opposition would think he was ineligible when in fact he wasn't.

Straws and desperate clutching come to mind

in other words, you can't counteract my argument.

You asked how they would know, I've told you how they would know and also how they would be wrong as well.


I have also told you the guidelines a referee is given in this scenario - it is not my fault that you won't listen.

[Nice One Cyril]

in other words, you can't counteract my argument.

You asked how they would know, I've told you how they would know and also how they would be wrong as well.

I have also told you the guidelines a referee is given in this scenario - it is not my fault that you won't listen.

Throwing out random scenarios is not really a coherent argument. What if an alien came down from outer space and took over a player's body? If the card says he's eligible and the photo matches the player, then he's eligible. If it doesn't, then he's not. If it had the wrong name and DOB on it, then that's the FFSA's problem but the team doing the checking still wouldn't know.

And, I'm sorry, I just don't believe you about the referees' guidance. It would run counter to common law, where the referee and the clubs have a duty of care, to allow an ineligible player to participate.

Any proper refs out there care enough to let us know what the FFSA policy is?

No wonder you and Col have so much fun together

[God is an Englishman]

in other words, you can't counteract my argument.

You asked how they would know, I've told you how they would know and also how they would be wrong as well.

I have also told you the guidelines a referee is given in this scenario - it is not my fault that you won't listen.

Throwing out random scenarios is not really a coherent argument. What if an alien came down from outer space and took over a player's body? If the card says he's eligible and the photo matches the player, then he's eligible. If it doesn't, then he's not. If it had the wrong name and DOB on it, then that's the FFSA's problem but the team doing the checking still wouldn't know.

And, I'm sorry, I just don't believe you about the referees' guidance. It would run counter to common law, where the referee and the clubs have a duty of care, to allow an ineligible player to participate.

Any proper refs out there care enough to let us know what the FFSA policy is?

No wonder you and Col have so much fun together

I am a qualified referee, Rob Lozza is a qualified ref and he agrees with me.

I am giving you a very simple argument, one that is very EASY to happen. A typo on a name could mean the player appears to be ineligible but isn't.

So basically, you are callling me a liar.

[Nice One Cyril]

in other words, you can't counteract my argument.

You asked how they would know, I've told you how they would know and also how they would be wrong as well.

I have also told you the guidelines a referee is given in this scenario - it is not my fault that you won't listen.

Throwing out random scenarios is not really a coherent argument. What if an alien came down from outer space and took over a player's body? If the card says he's eligible and the photo matches the player, then he's eligible. If it doesn't, then he's not. If it had the wrong name and DOB on it, then that's the FFSA's problem but the team doing the checking still wouldn't know.

And, I'm sorry, I just don't believe you about the referees' guidance. It would run counter to common law, where the referee and the clubs have a duty of care, to allow an ineligible player to participate.

Any proper refs out there care enough to let us know what the FFSA policy is?

No wonder you and Col have so much fun together

I am a qualified referee, Rob Lozza is a qualified ref and he agrees with me.

I am giving you a very simple argument, one that is very EASY to happen. A typo on a name could mean the player appears to be ineligible but isn't.

So basically, you are callling me a liar.

I think it's highly unlikely that a obvious typo on the name would worry the checking team so long as the photo matches, although I accept that a typo on the DOB could make an eligible player ineligible in the eyes of the checking team. That would be bad luck for the player but his club would and should have checked the cards when they came back from the FFSA and had it corrected. There would be no way of telling his true age from the point of view of the checking team, so he would be ineligible to play.

If you're a qualified FFSA ref (I note you didn't give the body under which you qualified) then I will accept that FFSA tell their refs not to get involved. All I can say is, they and the clubs are leaving themselves open to a lawsuit if they are negligent in their duty of care of a minor in their charge.

Finally, I'm sure you never lie, just massage the truth a little.

[Bomber]

Yep, I remember the typo when Harry Marfunkoulos was oddly mistaken for Andy Evans. On the rego cards at least they had the same colour hair........well, nearly.

[muts]

Since the start of 2010 season refs do the card check - when requested.
Any anomalies are reported by the ref if an apparently ineligible player takes to the pitch.

[Nice One Cyril]

Since the start of 2010 season refs do the card check - when requested.
Any anomalies are reported by the ref if an apparently ineligible player takes to the pitch.

Are you calling Hawkesy a liar?

[God is an Englishman]

Since the start of 2010 season refs do the card check - when requested.
Any anomalies are reported by the ref if an apparently ineligible player takes to the pitch.

Are you calling Hawkesy a liar?

quite the opposite

[God is an Englishman]

This is Keith Hackett's response in the guardian when the concern was over a suspended player being on the pitch

This isn't something you can deal with during the match: it's the club's responsibility to ensure that their players are allowed to take part. If they want to they can substitute the player, but if they decide to keep him on, that's their call too. You just need to make sure that both clubs know the situation, and that you will be making a full report to the authorities after the game.

[Nice One Cyril]

This is Keith Hackett's response in the guardian when the concern was over a suspended player being on the pitch

This isn't something you can deal with during the match: it's the club's responsibility to ensure that their players are allowed to take part. If they want to they can substitute the player, but if they decide to keep him on, that's their call too. You just need to make sure that both clubs know the situation, and that you will be making a full report to the authorities after the game.

No age restrictions in the leagues Hackett's talking about so not really relevant.

Like the sig though.

[God is an Englishman]

This is Keith Hackett's response in the guardian when the concern was over a suspended player being on the pitch

This isn't something you can deal with during the match: it's the club's responsibility to ensure that their players are allowed to take part. If they want to they can substitute the player, but if they decide to keep him on, that's their call too. You just need to make sure that both clubs know the situation, and that you will be making a full report to the authorities after the game.

No age restrictions in the leagues Hackett's talking about so not really relevant.

Like the sig though.

the principal is the same of it being an "ineligible" player.

[Nice One Cyril]

No age restrictions in the leagues Hackett's talking about so not really relevant.

Like the sig though.

the principal is the same of it being an "ineligible" player.

In your tiny intellect probably so. By your warped logic it would be OK for the referee to allow an 18 year old to play U10s.