QPR Points Deduction

[acooling08]

Please let this happen to Warncok the cvnt.

[Kitchandro]

Though it would be hilarious to see this happen to Warnock, a points deduction would be completely unfair. They are being investigated on a technicallity, they have been the best team in the division, and in any case one player should not be worth 15 points.

If anything they've only benefited financially so a fine should suffice.

[Kitchandro]

I really don't understand why it's such a serious offense. What difference does it make to the other teams in the league if the player was under third party ownership? It's only paperwork, it's not like blatant cheating on the field. It would be more fair if teams were deducted points for that. Jesus it's not like the whole team's been wearing jetpacks every game. Now THAT would put everyone else at a disadvantage.

And as someone has already said, he was signed last season, should they not be relegated to League 1 then?

I don't understand Clubs going into administration getting points deductions either, isn't being skint enough? I think us being banned from the transfer market was a fair punishment.

[Simmo86]

I really don't understand why it's such a serious offense. What difference does it make to the other teams in the league if the player was under third party ownership? It's only paperwork, it's not like blatant cheating on the field. It would be more fair if teams were deducted points for that. Jesus it's not like the whole team's been wearing jetpacks every game. Now THAT would put everyone else at a disadvantage.

And as someone has already said, he was signed last season, should they not be relegated to League 1 then?

I don't understand Clubs going into administration getting points deductions either, isn't being skint enough? I think us being banned from the transfer market was a fair punishment.

Luton got a 10 point deduction for making illegal payments to agents which is just one of the charges QPR face, so that has set a precedent.

The most serious charge in my eyes is forging the paperwork given to the FA to try and make the whole thing look legal, they knew they were doing wrong and tried to cover it up.

Whether that should effect the players and manager when they had nothing to do with it I don't know, but it seems unfair when teams have recieved penalties for commiting similar offences that QPR should only get away with a heavy fine.

[Dickie Greenleaf]

Even more confident there'll will be no (or just a minimal) points deduction. FA's case is based around a supposedly unaccounted for 2.9 mill, but it aint dodgy, its just that QPR were boasting that he cost £3.5 on their website, when he was miles cheaper. The whole thing could have been avoided, so it will be a face saving deduction at best that will still see them Champions if the get a draw against Leeds

[Joe.]

I can't see how they're not going to get a points deduction when you look at previous punishments. If they're found guilty they're going to get royally fucked.

[Babylon]

Maybe a points deduction that leaves them in second spot?

That's what I'm putting money on.

[davieG]

http://qprreport.blogspot.com/2011/05/qpr-report-wednesday-update-fa.html?

Daily Mail/Charles Sale - QPR lawyers are also playing for the FA

- One certain winner from the FA hearing into QPR's signing of Alejandro Faurlin are London law practice Blackstone Chambers, who are supplying lead barristers for both sides.

The QC heading the FA prosecution is Adam Lewis and his colleague from the same Temple chambers, Ian Mill, is defending the Championship winners, who are facing seven charges. Both lawyers are acknowledged experts in sports law.

Mill is described on the Blackstone website as 'the guy you go to if you really want to tough it out', and Lewis 'stands alone at the Bar in terms of his dedication to sports work'.

But although the choice of QCs is not a surprise, it is causing comment in legal circles that Blackstone should be so heavily involved when former QPR director Nick De Marco is one of their junior barristers, working alongside Mill.

De Marco, another sports law specialist, was brought on to the Loftus Road board in 2007 by chairman Gianni Paladini after building a friendship while offering the then struggling club free legal advice as a QPR fan. De Marco left following the Flavio Briatore-led takeover. Mail

Walesonline Overview/Chris Wathan - QPR hire celebrities’ lawyer to fight their case

QPR hire celebrities’ lawyer to fight their case

QUEENS PARK RANGERS have come out fighting in their bid to avoid a promotion-costing points deduction – by hiring Joe Calzaghe’s lawyer.

QPR yesterday formally denied the seven charges made against them that could yet see the Londoners thrown out of the race for the Premier League – and propel Cardiff City and Swansea City back into the mix.

And they have made sure they have got the very best legal backing at the Wembley hearing after bringing on board celebrity legal eagle Ian Mill QC.

Mill was the man Welsh super-middleweight king Calzaghe had in his corner when he took legal action against former promoter Frank Warren.

And his own firm describes him as a real heavyweight in sports law, claiming he is: “The guy you go to if you really want to tough it out – he’s a real fighter and a fantastic cross-examiner.”

But the undefeated boxing champion is just one of the stellar names Mill has represented, with a client list that reads like a showbiz and sporting who’s who.

David Beckham, Mike Tyson, Lennox Lewis, Roman Abramovich’s Chelsea, and F1 teams McLaren and Williams have all put their faith in Mill when it comes to the courts, while he has also been called upon by the almost every governing body in sport from the FA and the Premier League to the IRB, the RFU, the ECB, the ICC and the PGA.

And that’s before you consider his clients in the entertainment business – a list that includes Michael Jackson, George Michael, U2, Elton John, Luciano Pavarotti, Sylvester Stallone, Katherine Jenkins and Tom Jones.

Mill has also shown he is not afraid to take on the big names after representing the former management companies of both Wayne Rooney and Charlotte Church in legal battles against the stars.

It’s an incredible CV – and just underlines how serious the Londoners are taking this legal battle to keep hold of their newly-earned Premier League place.

With some of the richest men in the world behind the Loftus Road side, it is clear QPR are sparing no expense in their defence against the charges surrounding the signing of midfielder Alejandro Faurlin.

Majority owner Lakshmi Mittal is regarded as the sixth-richest man in the world, while the club also have the backing of F1 chief Bernie Ecclestone

And chairman Gianni Paladini has declared the R’s intentions to go all the way in their bid to keep hold of their automatic promotion spot.

“We will fight all the way and justice will be done. We have not tried to cheat anybody,” said Paladini.

“We have done everything in good faith. We have done everything right.”

And it is clear Mill has not been brought on board simply because of a high-profile client basis – but because of his track record on the third-party ownership issue that is at the crux of this legal battle.

Mill was the man who made sure Sheffield United won a staggering £26.6m in compensation from West Ham in an out-of-court settlement from the fall-out of the Carlos Tevez affair.

United, then managed by current Hoops boss Neil Warnock, were given the huge figure after Mill successfully argued that Tevez’s role for West Ham was key in sending the Blades down – despite the fact he was not fully owned by the Hammers.

Ironically, the Tevez case has been the most common example used to explain the nature of some of the charges made against QPR, who are also alleged to have dealt with an unlicensed agent when signing Argentine midfielder Faurlin from Instituto de Cordoba in 2009.

It is thought Mill is the man Warnock went to for assurances his side’s bid for the top flight would not be derailed by this legal fight with the FA – with the veteran manager insisting he was “quietly confident” after his conversation.

Furthermore, he has also sat on FA disciplinary panels in the past – including the one that dismissed Rio Ferdinand’s appeal against an eight-month ban for missing a drugs test – so clearly knows the workings of football’s governance.

And he will now look to justify Warnock’s faith by trying to prove that there was no intentional wrong-doing on QPR’s part – and that any points deduction would not be warranted.

The FA’s Independent Regulatory Commission will hear QPR’s defence and are expected to make a ruling by Friday – just 24 hours before Cardiff and Swansea’s final Championship fixtures of the season.

And already – after FA sources suggested a 15-point deduction in reports last week – there is the very real threat of a heavy points penalty if the charges are upheld.

Former FA chief executive Mark Palios, someone who knows the disciplinary proceedings of the association inside out, yesterday suggested the evidence could yet damn QPR to a minimum 10-point punishment.

And, while the headlines have surrounded the third-party ownership issue thanks in no small part to the sensationalism of Tevez-gate, the role of an unauthorised agent as well as the alleged subsequent falsifying of documents carry equally severe penalties.

But QPR found themselves with at least one supporter yesterday as former Crystal Palace chairman Simon Jordan dismissed the notion of docked points.

He said: “The case they have got is flimsy. The FA and the Football League approved this transaction and were very well aware of what it was.

“The reason why this transaction has gone a little bit bandy is because QPR did something rather silly. It is often the case football clubs do this, they big up the cost of the player to appease their fans that they’re spending a load of dough.

“What QPR did was they had a certain figure attached to this player and they also had some additional figures if they wanted to take him longer term. The figures they quoted were nowhere near the figures they paid.

“The FA cleared the money, the FA received the money, but when QPR start going out saying they spent £3.5m on a player and none of that has been spent that’s when the FA came along and said ‘hang on a second, where’s this other money gone?’ That’s where the investigation came from.

“Now the third-party rule that they’re trying to apply was not in operation at the time they signed this player. They’ve got nothing. QPR are not going to get anything besides a slap across the wrist. I don’t think they did anything wrong.”

However, the FA’s charges are based on the fact they appeared unaware of the full facts of Faurlin’s transfer when the club attempted to register his new contract with the authorities last October – when the player became a fully-fledged QPR player. And one sports lawyer yesterday refused to rule out the possibility of QPR being hit with a points deduction – even if it comes into effect next season.

“The decision in the West Ham case will obviously be brought into the equation, and it should be noted in that in this case there was no points deduction, principally on the basis that such a sanction would have consigned the club to relegation, which was deemed to be unfair on the club’s supporters,” said Andrew Nixon of UK law firm Thomas Eggar.

“However, the situation is slightly different because the third-party rules were brought in after the Tevez dispute, so a deduction cannot be ruled out. Indeed, it is possible that any deduction, if it is imposed, could pass over until next season, and QPR could start next season in the Premier League with a negative points balance.”

QPR’s own players – who celebrated the Championship title following their weekend win at Watford – have united in defending their position as champions.

And midfielder Shaun Derry admitted he could not contemplate the disappointment if their promotion was denied, saying: “We have been the best team this year and we are up there on merit. What a hammer blow it would be to everybody connected with QPR.”

Star man Adel Taarabt added: “We have done the job on the pitch, so we deserve to be where we are. We didn’t cheat or do anything wrong. I don’t know what is happening upstairs, but the FA will make the decision and we will see.”

Bookies have backed QPR’s challenge, with one bookmaker pricing them at 4-11 to remain as champions.WalesonLine

THE EXPRESS/Matthew Dunn - QPR face £90m legal headache

If QPR end up playing in the Premier League next season, they could still end up paying the price

A LEADING sports lawyer has warned the panel meeting over the Alejandro Faurlin case that they have a £90million decision ahead of them.

If QPR end up playing in the Premier League next season, they could still end up paying the price, as Andrew Nixon, a Thomas Eggar associate, anticipates a private breach of contract lawsuit.

In particular, if the team finishing third fail to win promotion via the play-offs, QPR could be the subject of a massive compensation claim.

“They are all contracted parties to the rules,” said Nixon.

“If there is a considerable breach, especially with a reckless disregard to that contract, you could follow the logic to say that it led to a significant loss for somebody.

“The argument is that if QPR hadn’t done what they did, somebody else would be promoted.

“Then forensic accountants would be used to work out what the loss is, but it could easily get to that £90m figure.”

The argument is that if QPR hadn’t done what they did, somebody else would be promoted

The four-day hearing began yesterday at Wembley with a decision expected Friday, the day before the final round of Championship fixtures.

QPR have Ian Mill QC fighting their corner, the man who won £26.5m for Sheffield United from West Ham following the Carlos Tevez affair, after the Hammers had denied the seven charges against them. Express

Martin Samuel in The Mail who's serious journalist - FA PARTY PIECE IS AN EYE OPENER

The sudden interest of the Football Association in third-party ownership issues is intriguing, to say the least. The hearing into the contract of Queens Park Rangers player Alejandro Faurlin began on Tuesday and a verdict is expected by Friday.

[Haydos]

I really don't understand why it's such a serious offense. What difference does it make to the other teams in the league if the player was under third party ownership? It's only paperwork, it's not like blatant cheating on the field. It would be more fair if teams were deducted points for that. Jesus it's not like the whole team's been wearing jetpacks every game. Now THAT would put everyone else at a disadvantage.

And as someone has already said, he was signed last season, should they not be relegated to League 1 then?

I don't understand Clubs going into administration getting points deductions either, isn't being skint enough? I think us being banned from the transfer market was a fair punishment.

You constantly go on about your superior understanding of football yet you still don't understand that breaking the rules results in punishment. It's not like my car being parked on double yellows is going to kill anyone but I still get a fooking parking ticket.

You're pretty much saying that any laws that aren't in place to prevent the most drastic of things aren't worth having. Most of what you said is just.......stupid.

There are laws in place to prevent 3rd party ownership because it's a controversial sub-industry that they don't want a part of in the English game. I'm pretty sure you get what it is anyhow. I just don't quite get how you don't understand that if clubs break these very serious laws they should be punished to make sure it doesn't become commonplace. If they were handed a slap on the wrist every time then nobody would give a shit and it would happen more and more.

It's the same with administration. It's to discourage the running of a club in a financially irresponsible way.

[Kitchandro]

Luton got a 10 point deduction for making illegal payments to agents which is just one of the charges QPR face, so that has set a precedent.

The most serious charge in my eyes is forging the paperwork given to the FA to try and make the whole thing look legal, they knew they were doing wrong and tried to cover it up.

Whether that should effect the players and manager when they had nothing to do with it I don't know, but it seems unfair when teams have recieved penalties for commiting similar offences that QPR should only get away with a heavy fine.

I agree with that, but at the same time I don't think the punishment fits the crime, I think they should change the rules.

[Kitchandro]

You constantly go on about your superior understanding of football yet you still don't understand that breaking the rules results in punishment. It's not like my car being parked on double yellows is going to kill anyone but I still get a fooking parking ticket.

You're pretty much saying that any laws that aren't in place to prevent the most drastic of things aren't worth having. Most of what you said is just.......stupid.

There are laws in place to prevent 3rd party ownership because it's a controversial sub-industry that they don't want a part of in the English game. I'm pretty sure you get what it is anyhow. I just don't quite get how you don't understand that if clubs break these very serious laws they should be punished to make sure it doesn't become commonplace. If they were handed a slap on the wrist every time then nobody would give a shit and it would happen more and more.

It's the same with administration. It's to discourage the running of a club in a financially irresponsible way.

Being heavily fined is hardly 'a slap on the wrist'. Like I said about us, if they've cheated financially or in the transfer market maybe it would make sense for them to have a transfer embargo.

I don't really see what you're getting at with 'you don't understand football' implication. I'm aware if someone breaks the rules they should be punished. What I'm saying is the rules are too strict and the punishments that are in place, unfair.

I'm struggling to see how you who is calling me so stupid can justify a team deservedly winning the league and then having it taken away from them because of one player's paperwork, a player who wasn't even signed this season or by the current manager. You haven't explained how it is fair at all.

[The Doctor]

I agree with that, but at the same time I don't think the punishment fits the crime, I think they should change the rules.

how so?

QPR have made illegal payments to agents and sent forged documents to the FA - bringing the game into disrepute for the sake of getting faurlin. Faurlin has then played a key part in their midfield this season and helped them pick up several points - points which have helped them to the title.

Given that he shouldn't have been playing due to all the laws QPR broke, why should they get to keep all of the points he helped guide them to?

Besides their chairman is one of the richest blokes in the world and they've won a promotion worth £90m - a simple fine isn't going to do any good what so ever and is not a good enough punishment for the crime.

[Haydos]

Being heavily fined is hardly 'a slap on the wrist'. Like I said about us, if they've cheated financially or in the transfer market maybe it would make sense for them to have a transfer embargo.

I don't really see what you're getting at with 'you don't understand football' implication. I'm aware if someone breaks the rules they should be punished. What I'm saying is the rules are too strict and the punishments that are in place, unfair.

I'm struggling to see how you who is calling me so stupid can justify a team deservedly winning the league and then having it taken away from them because of one player's paperwork, a player who wasn't even signed this season or by the current manager. You haven't explained how it is fair at all.

I'm not really disagreeing with your take on the rules, only that they've broken them and should be punished in accordance with the rulebook (It depends what your take on heavy fine is, a lot of the time it will not be 'heavy' at all in the grand scheme of things, especially as they're no being promoted). There could probably be a better system for it (a transfer embargo would be severe and appropriate) but I empathise with the lawmakers as this is a part of the game which they really don't want anywhere near English football. Ergo, the best way to avoid it is using a massive deterrent. At the end of the day though, rules are rules and the club appear to have been aware of them and have not done anything about it.

While we're on the matter, it does seem that the laws (read: punishment for disobeying the laws) surrounding this case are very cloudy and this does come across as very unprofessional. After the Tevez/Mascherano incident I would have expected them to have a firm set of rules and punishments to fit different scenarios.

[Kitchandro]

how so?

QPR have made illegal payments to agents and sent forged documents to the FA - bringing the game into disrepute for the sake of getting faurlin. Faurlin has then played a key part in their midfield this season and helped them pick up several points - points which have helped them to the title.

Given that he shouldn't have been playing due to all the laws QPR broke, why should they get to keep all of the points he helped guide them to?

Besides their chairman is one of the richest blokes in the world and they've won a promotion worth £90m - a simple fine isn't going to do any good what so ever and is not a good enough punishment for the crime.

So you're saying because they're rich it's not fair to fine them? But it would be fair if they were skint like Plymouth for example?

Technically he shouldn't have been playing, but onlt technically. I'm really not sure how QPR have benefited from getting the player in the way they have, but it's certainly not points-wise. In any case 15 or even 30 points for one player? How do you come to that amount of points?

I don't think you're thinking about this in a football sense. The idea that a Club is demoted because of the paperwork of one player seems wrong to me.

[Kitchandro]

I'm not really disagreeing with your take on the rules, only that they've broken them and should be punished in accordance with the rulebook (It depends what your take on heavy fine is, a lot of the time it will not be 'heavy' at all in the grand scheme of things, especially as they're no being promoted). There could probably be a better system for it (a transfer embargo would be severe and appropriate) but I empathise with the lawmakers as this is a part of the game which they really don't want anywhere near English football. Ergo, the best way to avoid it is using a massive deterrent. At the end of the day though, rules are rules and the club appear to have been aware of them and have not done anything about it.

While we're on the matter, it does seem that the laws (read: punishment for disobeying the laws) surrounding this case are very cloudy and this does come across as very unprofessional. After the Tevez/Mascherano incident I would have expected them to have a firm set of rules and punishments to fit different scenarios.

I think that's a fair point, the fact that they are in a position where they still have to decide what the punishment is at the end of the season, knowing how many points they and the other sides have accumulated, is unprofessional.

I agree if they have purposely broke the rules they should be punished, perhaps heavily, but I think a punishment that costs them promotion is over the top when you look at it from a footballing point of view.

I'd also like to know who the individuals are that have actually broke the rules.

[Simmo86]

So you're saying because they're rich it's not fair to fine them? But it would be fair if they were skint like Plymouth for example?

Technically he shouldn't have been playing, but onlt technically. I'm really not sure how QPR have benefited from getting the player in the way they have, but it's certainly not points-wise. In any case 15 or even 30 points for one player? How do you come to that amount of points?

I don't think you're thinking about this in a football sense. The idea that a Club is demoted because of the paperwork of one player seems wrong to me.

But then is it fair for the owners of the club who are behind all this wrong doing to gain all the extra revenue from the club being promoted to the Premier League?

They need to be punished for their blatant disregarding of the rules and the only way of doing that is stopping them from being in the Premier League.

[Dickie Greenleaf]

Only if you think that 'disregard for for the rules' has resulted in the 9 (essentially 10 due to GD) point gap between them and third

[The Doctor]

So you're saying because they're rich it's not fair to fine them?

No I'm saying it will do no good to just fine them because it's hardly a deterrant when they have the money they do.

But it would be fair if they were skint like Plymouth for example?

Where did i say that?

Technically he shouldn't have been playing, but onlt technically. I'm really not sure how QPR have benefited from getting the player in the way they have, but it's certainly not points-wise.

Who's to say QPR could have got the player legally - they've benefitted from breaking the rules both financially (I'd imagine 3rd party ownership is a lot cheaper than signing a player legally) and on a points basis so they should really be punished for both benefits - a fine and points deduction

In any case 15 or even 30 points for one player? How do you come to that amount of points?

Precedents - 10 of the 30 points luton had deducted were for illegal payments to agents IIRC, add into that forged papers trying to pull the wool over the FA's eyes and QPR should face a deduction much greater than 10 points since the last one is such a serious offence

I don't think you're thinking about this in a football sense.

no i'm not but i don't need to be thinking in a football sense, that is completely irrelevant, they've broken rules which have seen points deductions before and have broken the law trying to cover up those rule breaks and should be punished as such.

The idea that a Club is demoted because of the paperwork of one player seems wrong to me

QPR were well aware of the rules regarding the paperwork, there is no reason they should not feel the force of the law and that should almost certainly result in a points deduction which would see them drop into the play-offs or out of promotion contention altogether.

[davieG]

So you're saying because they're rich it's not fair to fine them? But it would be fair if they were skint like Plymouth for example?

Technically he shouldn't have been playing, but onlt technically. I'm really not sure how QPR have benefited from getting the player in the way they have, but it's certainly not points-wise. In any case 15 or even 30 points for one player? How do you come to that amount of points?

I don't think you're thinking about this in a football sense. The idea that a Club is demoted because of the paperwork of one player seems wrong to me.

If a club plays an ineligible player and wins the rule through out the leagues is the points are forfeited, clubs in the lower leagues are often 'done' for this and it's almost always an administrative cock up or misunderstanding mostly because they haven't got the staff that clubs like QPR have and rarely if ever is it intentional. Why should a team get away with it, assuming that's what they've done just because it would affect their promotion.

Luton got docked 10 points for just one of the offences that QPR are accused . It matters not if the rules are fair at this stage they exist and therefore must be adhered to and the punishment applied must be fair to those that have previously been found guilty.

[Simmo86]

And also Hereford and Torquay got deducted points recently for fielding ineligible players

[Kitchandro]

But then is it fair for the owners of the club who are behind all this wrong doing to gain all the extra revenue from the club being promoted to the Premier League?

They need to be punished for their blatant disregarding of the rules and the only way of doing that is stopping them from being in the Premier League.

No.

But If a heavy fine doesn't punish the owners then how does the Club not being promoted punish the owners? You might as well just fine the owners and the individuals involved in the wrong doing a large amount.

By not promoting QPR you are making little difference to the owner but a lot of difference to the Club and more importantly it's fans.

The owners don't care about the Club so they will continue to break the rules in search of the financial reward the Premier League brings because they know that they are only risking the Club's future, not their own.

This is why despite the points deductions for administration, Clubs are going into administration more than ever. The rules are not a deterrent.

[davieG]

No.

But If a heavy fine doesn't punish the owners then how does the Club not being promoted punish the owners? You might as well just fine the owners and the individuals involved in the wrong doing a large amount.

By not promoting QPR you are making little difference to the owner but a lot of difference to the Club and more importantly it's fans.

The owners don't care about the Club so they will continue to break the rules in search of the financial reward the Premier League brings because they know that they are only risking the Club's future, not their own.

This is why despite the points deductions for administration, Clubs are going into administration more than ever. The rules are not a deterrent.

I agree with the sentiments but it would need to be a really massive fine for it to be a deterrent as the rewards are so great. The obvious solution and I guess they are trying is to monitor/police all financial aspects of the clubs and to ensure all financial transactions are totally transparent not only to the authorities but the fans themselves. This would require a team of auditors which could be funded by a levy on the clubs.

Sure there will be moans about keeping some finances secret for business reasons but it's these same 'clandestine' transactions that make devious dealing possible.

It should also include powers to stop clubs spending what they haven't got or can't secure thus removing the potential for administration, I've never been in favour of the 10 point punishment. Prevention is better than cure and I'm sure a more vigilant approach would cure.

But that's the future and QPR are accused of breaking existing rules where precedents have already been set.

[Kitchandro]

No I'm saying it will do no good to just fine them because it's hardly a deterrant when they have the money they do.

Where did i say that?

Who's to say QPR could have got the player legally - they've benefitted from breaking the rules both financially (I'd imagine 3rd party ownership is a lot cheaper than signing a player legally) and on a points basis so they should really be punished for both benefits - a fine and points deduction

Precedents - 10 of the 30 points luton had deducted were for illegal payments to agents IIRC, add into that forged papers trying to pull the wool over the FA's eyes and QPR should face a deduction much greater than 10 points since the last one is such a serious offence

no i'm not but i don't need to be thinking in a football sense, that is completely irrelevant, they've broken rules which have seen points deductions before and have broken the law trying to cover up those rule breaks and should be punished as such.

QPR were well aware of the rules regarding the paperwork, there is no reason they should not feel the force of the law and that should almost certainly result in a points deduction which would see them drop into the play-offs or out of promotion contention altogether.

My point is you say fines aren't a detrrent for QPR because they have lots of money. But it is wrong for them to make punishments on the basis of the Club's financial position. As I've just said in another pst, points deductions are not a deterrent because largely, the people breaking the rules do not care about the Club. They should be punishing individuals, not the whole Club.

Ok so they've got the player 'illegally'. How do you know that they wouldn't have gone up they had used a player which they had got legally? You can't prove that he contributed more than any other player would have done.

People keep saying there are precedents, but that doesn't mean that those punishments were right either. As Haydos says it is ridiculous that there isn't even a set punishment for Clubs/people breaking certain rules. The FA are just as corrupt in this sense. They can hand down any punishment they like and with QPR already promoted, they know how many points they are ahead of 2nd/3rd/7th/22nd place, and this knowledge can come into play when making the judgement.

Of course you need to think about it in a football sense - that's what the sport is, football. The rules are there to protect the integrity of the sport and make it fair and enjoyable for it's fans. You can't just have a system where Clubs are relegated and deducted points willy nilly for all sorts of things. It's come to the stage where most years there is at least one team which is deducted points. Something's wrong there.

I'm sure a lot of people here want to see Warnock suffer and I think that is a factor. But if I was a manager, even one that would benefit from a QPR points deduction, I would not want to see it happen. The point is QPR have clearly been the best team and no one else in the league should feel hard done to.

Can somebody explain what is exactly wrong with paying a third party, who the individuals are who were aware that they had done this and how this makes the player cheaper?

[m00nie]

i thought they signed the player in 2009?

so really the issue lies from back then and this season shouldnt be punished for it..

i thought i read they tried to sort the paperwork out legally before this season even started ??

[Kitchandro]

If a club plays an ineligible player and wins the rule through out the leagues is the points are forfeited, clubs in the lower leagues are often 'done' for this and it's almost always an administrative cock up or misunderstanding mostly because they haven't got the staff that clubs like QPR have and rarely if ever is it intentional. Why should a team get away with it, assuming that's what they've done just because it would affect their promotion.

Luton got docked 10 points for just one of the offences that QPR are accused . It matters not if the rules are fair at this stage they exist and therefore must be adhered to and the punishment applied must be fair to those that have previously been found guilty.

If there was a set punishment for each crime, then fair enough, whilst the rules are in place, whether I agree with them or not, they must get a points deduction.

However whilst there has been a precedent set it's not an offical rule. The FA can just deduct them 30 points in an attempt to make an example out of them, if they like. It seems no one is policing the police so to speak. And with it being left so late after they have collected 88 points, that knowledge becomes a factor in the number of points deducted.

If they must be deducted points therefore, I think it would make more sense for it to be next season.