QPR - CHEATS ????

[Nottingham Fox]

I couldn't make the game yesterday, but was sursprised to see Paul Furlong in the starting 11 for them. He was sent off on Saturday and was due to start a 3 match ban immediately. However QPR appealed against his red card so therfore he could play.

On reading the reports after the games on new years day, Ian Holloway in every paper i read, was un-happy with Furlong for getting himself sent off. He is quoted as saying 'What Paul (Furlong) did was madness and unnecessary' Ian Holloway also said that he had a long chat with Paul after the his red card to make sure it didn't happen again.

Now that to me looks like they accept he deserved to go, had no problems with the decision and had to pay the consequences as per any other club. However I feel that QPR appealed purely so he could play against us as he punished us last time we played.

It would be interesting to put this forward to the FA to see what they think ??

 

[Durham Fox]

Good post, agree whole heartedly. The new rules were supposed to stop this from happening.

 

[Naughty Fox]

Could well be the case, but they have not broken any rules and if they felt they needed to do this so he played against us then so be it.
I think the problem is having the appeal granted in the first place. I do not know the Furlong incident, but if it was clearly a sending off then the appeal should not even be concidered.
We would not moan if it was us that exploited a loop hole.

 

[homer]

They haven't broken any rules, so no problem

And as he played like a complete twonk, they didn't gain any advantage

 

[Durham Fox]

Come to think of it, I guess we have exploited a loophole in the rules by blatantly only playing Tiatto to clear his suspension whilst he is injured. If anyone heard the interveiw with Levein on Radio Leicester after the game there was no doubt this is why he played for 20 mins, to get booked.

 

[webmaster]

The rules for appeals have changed this season, and QPR will face a punishment if they've made an appeal without having a good reason to believe Furlong is innocent.

 

[leicester_til_i_die]

The rules for appeals have changed this season, and QPR will face a punishment if they've made an appeal without having a good reason to believe Furlong is innocent.

the punishment will be a fine, nothing much, doesn't really give them a disadvantage!

 

[webmaster]

The rules for appeals have changed this season, and QPR will face a punishment if they've made an appeal without having a good reason to believe Furlong is innocent.

the punishment will be a fine, nothing much, doesn't really give them a disadvantage!

The suspension can be doubled if they believe the appeal isn't genuine.

 

[Nottingham Fox]

The rules for appeals have changed this season, and QPR will face a punishment if they've made an appeal without having a good reason to believe Furlong is innocent.

the punishment will be a fine, nothing much, doesn't really give them a disadvantage!

The suspension can be doubled if they believe the appeal isn't genuine.

Surely webbo the comments made in the press will confirm they had no reason to appeal.

 

[Country Fox]

at the end of the day we won so its not really made a difference to us and im not particularly bothered about what other teams are doing, more concerned with what we do ourselves.

 

[Nottingham Fox]

I agree Country, however Furlong could have scored to equalise then maybe a winner. I know it's all if's and but's, but 2 points dropped or even 3 could have been vital if we have any chance of reaching the play-offs.

 

[BighandJon]

If only we'd of thought of it with Gillespie

 

[webmaster]

The rules for appeals have changed this season, and QPR will face a punishment if they've made an appeal without having a good reason to believe Furlong is innocent.

the punishment will be a fine, nothing much, doesn't really give them a disadvantage!

The suspension can be doubled if they believe the appeal isn't genuine.

Surely webbo the comments made in the press will confirm they had no reason to appeal.

The comments made after the match may have been before they saw video evidence, which could have changed their mind. But if there's no evidence to support the appeal the hearing should increase the punishment.


I don't even know what he was sent off for so I have no idea if it was justified or not.

 

[webmaster]

I agree Country, however Furlong could have scored to equalise then maybe a winner. I know it's all if's and but's, but 2 points dropped or even 3 could have been vital if we have any chance of reaching the play-offs.

But we may benefit at other stages in the season, for the same reason, if a team playing against us has a delayed suspension following an appeal.

We shouldn't really be concerned with what suspensions etc our opponents have, we should concentrate on our own team.

 

[Joe_Fox]

I agree Country, however Furlong could have scored to equalise then maybe a winner. I know it's all if's and but's, but 2 points dropped or even 3 could have been vital if we have any chance of reaching the play-offs.

But we may benefit at other stages in the season, for the same reason, if a team playing against us has a delayed suspension following an appeal.

We shouldn't really be concerned with what suspensions etc our opponents have, we should concentrate on our own team.

Never a truer word spoken apart from when I said about the principle of locality.

 

[step]

Why cant the appeals be heard during the week after the incident. They cant take that long to sort out.

 

[webmaster]

Why cant the appeals be heard during the week after the incident. They cant take that long to sort out.

I think they're trying to do the hearings quicker, but when a player gets sent off on new years day, and the next match is two days later, it's difficult to do anything.
I think one club (Newcastle?) offered to pay the wages of someone at the FA to go in on new year's day to sort out a transfer in time for Monday, but the FA refused, so there's no chance of them doing an appeal during the holiday.