Three points debacle

Gibson’s greatest coup was convincing the majority of the local populace that it was all the Premier League/FA’s fault.
 
Michael_Vronsky said:
Exactly. Not sure why this is so difficult to comprehend. And I find it baffling that some of our supporters are seemingly okay with it!
Click to expand...
Because it's entirely fine to be upset with the punishment received whilst acknowledging and understanding the reasons for that.
 
MFP said:
Because it's entirely fine to be upset with the punishment received whilst acknowledging and understanding the reasons for that.
Click to expand...

Well I'll never understand or accept the reasoning so there you have it. It would NOT have happened to any other club and if you think it would, then sadly you're deluded I'm afraid.
 
Michael_Vronsky said:
Well I'll never understand or accept the reasoning so there you have it. It would NOT have happened to any other club and if you think it would, then sadly you're deluded I'm afraid.
Click to expand...
Why is it not the people who insist the reason we were relegated was because of a Mackem on the FA appeal panel, or a conspiracy of a personal hatred of the club within the PL who are the deluded ones, even though their beliefs on the issue revolve around making baseless assumptions about motivations and agendas?
 
The issue for me isn't really "did we break the rules?". Because we did. The issue is was a 3 point deduction fair and reasonable in the circumstances?

Mine, and others, argument, is that given the ridiculously vague advice we received at the time that implied we'd be ok to postpone then the penalty was disproportionately harsh.

The "whataboutery" or whatever you want to call it, is relevant because it's some sort of benchmark as to the "usual" punishment clubs receive for breaking the rules. Yes, West Ham is not exactly the same situation but it's still relevant on that basis. It's like saying you can't complain if a shoplifter gets a harsher sentence than a murderer. You can still legitimately draw some comparison even if it's not a perfect like for like situation.

So my opinion is the punishment didn't fit the crime. It was, for me, a crime of ignorance and naivety as opposed to a deliberate attempt to cheat. Other clubs have been found to have intentionally broke rules to cheat and been hit with lesser punishments.

It's only an opinion mind. Just as the idea that the "club got what they deserved" is just an opinion too, albeit one I don't agree with.
 
As I pointed out earlier, our biggest mistake, error, was not getting it in writing from whoever they spoke to at the FA
We should have been in touch with Blackburn regarding not travelling

That result certainly knocked us back a few seasons, did we ever get back to that level of expectation?
 
Yep hindsight is a good thing, any 11 players fit enough to represent the Boro on the day should have gone & played & we wouldn't be having this conversation, but the fact of the matter was we were through the proper channels & got the answer needed, yes we should have contacted Blackburn but you would have thought something as big & professional as the PL would have put such thing in motion
 
festa5 said:
The issue for me isn't really "did we break the rules?". Because we did. The issue is was a 3 point deduction fair and reasonable in the circumstances?

Mine, and others, argument, is that given the ridiculously vague advice we received at the time that implied we'd be ok to postpone then the penalty was disproportionately harsh.

The "whataboutery" or whatever you want to call it, is relevant because it's some sort of benchmark as to the "usual" punishment clubs receive for breaking the rules. Yes, West Ham is not exactly the same situation but it's still relevant on that basis. It's like saying you can't complain if a shoplifter gets a harsher sentence than a murderer. You can still legitimately draw some comparison even if it's not a perfect like for like situation.

So my opinion is the punishment didn't fit the crime. It was, for me, a crime of ignorance and naivety as opposed to a deliberate attempt to cheat. Other clubs have been found to have intentionally broke rules to cheat and been hit with lesser punishments.

It's only an opinion mind. Just as the idea that the "club got what they deserved" is just an opinion too, albeit one I don't agree with.
Click to expand...

Totally agree with this.

It might be my old mind playing tricks on me but I'm sure when they announced the punishment they actually said something like "the board accepts Middlesbrough acted in good faith". Which like @festa5 said makes it all the more baffling they hammered us. Effectively, you made an honest mistake but we will punish you and also randomly reward all the teams around you too.

I think awarding the game to Blackburn even as something like a 10 nil defeat (to effect the goal difference as something like a 3-0 defeat doesn't seem a sufficient deterrent to teams who fear they might get a pasting) would have been fairer.
 
I think the whole episode underlines how amateurishly the club was run.

Gibson’s letter to the Premier League hasn’t even been adequately checked for typos and grammatical errors!

Did the club not have legal advisers prior to engaging George Carman?
 
festa5 said:
The issue for me isn't really "did we break the rules?". Because we did. The issue is was a 3 point deduction fair and reasonable in the circumstances?

Mine, and others, argument, is that given the ridiculously vague advice we received at the time that implied we'd be ok to postpone then the penalty was disproportionately harsh.

The "whataboutery" or whatever you want to call it, is relevant because it's some sort of benchmark as to the "usual" punishment clubs receive for breaking the rules. Yes, West Ham is not exactly the same situation but it's still relevant on that basis. It's like saying you can't complain if a shoplifter gets a harsher sentence than a murderer. You can still legitimately draw some comparison even if it's not a perfect like for like situation.

So my opinion is the punishment didn't fit the crime. It was, for me, a crime of ignorance and naivety as opposed to a deliberate attempt to cheat. Other clubs have been found to have intentionally broke rules to cheat and been hit with lesser punishments.

It's only an opinion mind. Just as the idea that the "club got what they deserved" is just an opinion too, albeit one I don't agree with.
Click to expand...

Yeah I just don’t agree with this. I think the punishment does fit the crime. It was within the range of options available for this breach of the rules, it was not just naive, incompetent and negligent but, as Mustoe has since confirmed, driven because our three star men weren’t available. We were, in truth, trying to pull a fast one.

And using your analogy, you would have legitimate cause for complaint were a murderer to receive a lighter sentence than the shoplifter, that’s true. But the complaint would be that the murderer’s sentence was too lenient rather than the shoplifters sentence being too harsh.

But my chief complaint right back to my first post is the way in which that season and this episode is remembered. We behaved like amateurs and then blamed everyone but ourselves for the stupidity.
 
It's clearly a load of b***ks to say it fits the crime.
We are the only club in the history of English league football to be deducted 3 points for failing to fulfil a fixture, a deduction that ultimately relegated us.

But we are far from the only team to fail to fulfil a fixture, I've already given the example of Derby 2 years ago who cancelled on the day because of snow despite the area around the ground being fine and the pitch in perfect condition.
They just so happened to have a huge injury crisis at the time, which couldn't possibly be connected.

I'd mention Rotherham two games ago, literally cancelling as Derby pulled up at the ground, but a pandemic is a pandemic.

The season before last, Bolton failed to fulfil a fixture against Brentford, they didn't even fulfil the rearranged fixture, the only outcome was that Brentford were awarded a win.
 
Adi_Dem said:
Yeah I just don’t agree with this. I think the punishment does fit the crime. It was within the range of options available for this breach of the rules, it was not just naive, incompetent and negligent but, as Mustoe has since confirmed, driven because our three star men weren’t available. We were, in truth, trying to pull a fast one.

And using your analogy, you would have legitimate cause for complaint were a murderer to receive a lighter sentence than the shoplifter, that’s true. But the complaint would be that the murderer’s sentence was too lenient rather than the shoplifters sentence being too harsh.

But my chief complaint right back to my first post is the way in which that season and this episode is remembered. We behaved like amateurs and then blamed everyone but ourselves for the stupidity.
Click to expand...
I’m pretty sure we had our ‘star men’ available I remember it being used as a stick to beat us with at the time. Maybe Emerson was out.. Ravanelli was defo fit and Beck

17 players fit, including 3 goalkeepers and 5 academy lads who hadn’t played for the first team. In reality that means only one academy lad would have started. With nine first team outfield players able to star. Maybe Robson and Anderson were included in that lot.

I seem to remember we had a lot of defenders and midfielders out.
 
TeaCider said:
It's clearly a load of b***ks to say it fits the crime.
We are the only club in the history of English league football to be deducted 3 points for failing to fulfil a fixture, a deduction that ultimately relegated us.

But we are far from the only team to fail to fulfil a fixture, I've already given the example of Derby 2 years ago who cancelled on the day because of snow despite the area around the ground being fine and the pitch in perfect condition.
They just so happened to have a huge injury crisis at the time, which couldn't possibly be connected.

I'd mention Rotherham two games ago, literally cancelling as Derby pulled up at the ground, but a pandemic is a pandemic.

The season before last, Bolton failed to fulfil a fixture against Brentford, they didn't even fulfil the rearranged fixture, the only outcome was that Brentford were awarded a win.
Click to expand...

None of those were in the Premier League, which has and had a very clear set of rules. Incidentally, we have also cancelled fixtures late in the day for snow and received no punishment. We failed to fulfil a fixture because we didn't fancy it. Not because of safety related matters or anything else remotely reasonable. We decided to pull a fast one and were punished for it. And that punishment definitely fits the crime.

newyddion said:
I’m pretty sure we had our ‘star men’ available I remember it being used as a stick to beat us with at the time. Maybe Emerson was out.. Ravanelli was defo fit and Beck

17 players fit, including 3 goalkeepers and 5 academy lads who hadn’t played for the first team. In reality that means only one academy lad would have started. With nine first team outfield players able to star. Maybe Robson and Anderson were included in that lot.

I seem to remember we had a lot of defenders and midfielders out.
Click to expand...

No, Rav, Emo and Juninho were out - as Mustoe confirmed yesterday.
 
Adi_Dem said:
None of those were in the Premier League, which has and had a very clear set of rules. Incidentally, we have also cancelled fixtures late in the day for snow and received no punishment. We failed to fulfil a fixture because we didn't fancy it. Not because of safety related matters or anything else remotely reasonable. We decided to pull a fast one and were punished for it. And that punishment definitely fits the crime.
Click to expand...

It clearly doesn't.

To this day it's the only non-administration related points deduction to ever occur in the Premier League, and there have been teams that have actually cheated in that time period.

Let's not forget that we also did fulfil the fixture at a later date.

They also demonstratably did not have a very clear set of rules or the club would have put out a scratch side.
You can rightly call the club incompetent for not doing so, but I can't see how anyone can argue it was clear that a points deduction would follow.
 
TeaCider said:
It clearly doesn't.

To this day it's the only non-administration related points deduction to ever occur in the Premier League, and there have been teams that have actually cheated in that time period.

They also demonstratably did not have a very clear set of rules or the club would have put out a scratch side.
Click to expand...

As they should have done in the absence of getting confirmation in writing that the circumstances constitued 'just cause'. A combination of negligence and incompetence were the foundations of the decision to postpone, which itself was driven by a desire not to play the game because we had our best players out and Blackburn were flying. You describe other clubs as having 'actually cheated' but somehow don't see this as trying to cheat. We got what we deserved. If you want to talk about whether other clubs (like West Ham) got what they deserved then we can have that conversation but it doesn't change the fact that this was a clear breach of the rules and the rules provided for this penalty.
 
Adi_Dem said:
As they should have done in the absence of getting confirmation in writing that the circumstances constitued 'just cause'. A combination of negligence and incompetence led to the decision to postpone, which itself was driven by a desire not to play the game because we had our best players out and Blackburn were flying. You describe other clubs as having 'actually cheated' but somehow don't see this as trying to cheat.
Click to expand...

So it wasn't a very clear set of rules at all then?
Exactly.

The club were wrong not to play the match, every man and their dog is aware of that.
It doesn't mean the points deduction was correct.
If you're happy to disregard the Tevez counter-example then there's no real point debating it.
 
can everybody just agree what adi dem says is always right then we can end this thread.
another one ruined.
i.m.o.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top