Burnley News 24/7Writer: turfmanphil 
Date:Monday January 26 2009
Time: 8:03AM
UK time is: 04:06:25
Choose your club
Other Sites
Network Navigation
Vital Partners
'If It's Football, It's Vital'
Was Defoe Eligible to Play?-Burnley to Ask FL?
Burnley, according to the Daily Mirror, will be writing to the Football League to clarify whether Jermain Defoe was eligible to play for Tottenham in the Carling Cup semi-final. Defoe was in the starting eleven for the second leg and indeed scored the second Spurs goal in that heartbreak last two minutes of extra time.
Defoe was paraded in front of the crowd before the start of the first leg at White Hart Lane having supposedly signed from Portsmouth.
He did not of course appear in that game as he had signed too late in the day.
However it would also appear that although he had signed a deal he had not been officially registered before the start of the first leg which Spurs ultimately won 4-1.
The Clarets are therefore seeking clarification as to whether the player was eligible to play in the second leg of the tie if he was not eligible in the first.
It is believed that the rules state that players must be signed before the 'tie' starts.
The 'tie' therefore presumably applies to both legs since they are part of the one final result with aggregate scores being taken into account.
This will form the basis of the Clarets case and they may have a point. The implications could be hugely significant if Defoe is found to be not eligible to play.
The heartbreak of Wednesday night last week when the Clarets after 90 minutes were leading 3-0 before Spurs scored two goals in the last two minutes of extra time is still being felt by all Clarets fans. The 6-4 aggregate win with Spurs booking a Carling Cup Final trip to Wembley still wrangles at the back of all Clarets fans' minds.
If the case is proven , could this mean it is the Clarets who will be going to Wembley? We are a long way from that at the moment but the law is the law and it will be interesting to see how this enquiry develops.
It would be rough justice on Spurs if their Wembley final is taken away from them but then it also seems rough justice at the moment for the Clarets.
It is only the Carling Cup that has this bizarre extra time ruling when aggregate scores are level after 90 minutes of the second leg. Surely if away goals count double, the Clarets won this match after 90 minutes and it is clear that the crazy rule of having to play 30 minutes of extra time hugely favours the team that is first out of the hat,playing the first leg at home.
In terms of the Carling Cup rules on this issue though,Spurs won fairly and squarely and the Clarets knew the rules, no matter how unfair they seemed.
However the Defoe situation is another matter and a potentially serious one that needs to be urgently clarified. I would not feel totally comfortable if we got to Wembley by the back door although I do think justice and fairness would be restored.
Seconds Out! Vital Boxing is here!
Vital F1 Prediction League - Join now for Monaco
Your Comments
I bet they find a way of ruling in favour of the Premier League side, but what an interesting development
turfmanphil
Good luck with this admirable campaign! The whole of Portsmouth is with you
hammersmithblue
Smacks of desperate!!!
Morgan.
..and of course Spurs wouldn't have been desperate had we won and played a player that was not eligible?
turfmanphil
You have to submit your team to the FA before a game, therefore if Defoe wasnt allowed to play then the FA would of said something. also when we played the FA again would of said something after the game.
spurs Babe
Clutching at straws comes to mind. Saying that u have never got to a league cup final so u will take whatever comes your way i suppose.
spurfect one
..and of course Spurs wouldn't have been clutching at straws had we won and played a player that was not eligible? ;-)
turfmanphil
LOL turfman i agree.
spurfect one
1) 4-1. You didn't deserve to go through. You benefitted from Spurs playing a weakened team in the second leg. They did this because of your 1st leg capitulation.
2) The second team out of the hat has the advantage from the extra 30mins, because it is played at the second team's ground.
To make the rules fair, you would have to play 15mins at Burnley, 15mins at Tottenham. At the point at which you go into the hat, both teams are in the same position, which is why it is fair. To be drawn at home for the second leg is a distinct advantage - so stop whining and meditate on the 4-1 - which is why you are out!
Stratty
I'm pretty sure it would of been asked before hand,he wasn't ineligible to play the first leg whatsoever,he just didn't sign in time.He was totally eligible to play in the carling cup so sorry you haven't got a case I'm afraid.
parklanebert
After the game you complain about the rules that have been well-known for decades. You got beaten on the pitch. Now you want to know whether the i's were dotted and the ts crossed and whether the paper work was all correctly signed and packaged and posted to the correct address. It does the great history of Burnley FC no credit. You got beat. It happens. Live with it. Move on.
Shannon
Oh, and may I say: Well played in that match, Burnley.
Shannon
Like I said above, I am not totally happy about it and it does seem a little tacky but then we are only doing what any other side would do,including Spurs in our position!
turfmanphil
The sponsors would never let Burnley get away with this. Too much money involved. So there is something to be said for your point.
Stratty
turfmanphil-we didn't field a player we shouldn't though,he WAS eligible for the first leg but his registration wasn't done in time to play that game there is a difference.we didn't play an ineligible player end of story.I agree with Loz this sort of thing will undo your good reputation,"what anyone would do" my a**e
parklanebert
Like I said you have too submit the tem to the FA or who ever before a game. Now they would of seen Defoe was on the tem sheet and if he wasnt allowed to play they would of said so. If they now decide that he wasnt then its there own fault not ours. We would of asked anyway!
spurs Babe
Look I dont know what the rule actually means in this situation, maybe even the FL dont, it seems a grey area that needs clarification. Dont pretend no other club,including Spurs wouldn't seek that clarification if there was a place at Wembley at stake.
turfmanphil
you lost on the pitch ffs,think you are believing your own hype tbh.you lost the first leg 4-1 thats why you went out,get over it and move on,very sad!
parklanebert
do you honestly think they will change it so that you're in the final?dream on.if there was a mistake it would be just as much theirs as ours. the most you can hope for is we get fined,but that won't even happen as we did nothing wrong get a grip!
parklanebert
I have no idea, in fact the Official Site have not made any statement yet whether we are actually appealing or not. At the moment this is just media gossip from the Daily Mirror. In we are though, I will be interested to see what the final outcome will be. Yes we lost but you got to admit in any other competition with away goals counting double based on aggregate scores we would have won after 90 minutes and the Carling Cup rule seems bizarre. You would think so too if the result had gone our way under similar circumstances
turfmanphil
http://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/sport/football/burnley/4073462.Away_goals_rule_not_the_reason_for_Burnley_s_Carling_Cup_exit/
read this and stop whining ffs.
parklanebert
Well it will be there fault just us much as ours if Burnley are right. They allowed him to play, so it would be unfair if they turn around now and say we cant play in the final.
Its abit like the UEFA and CL. You cant play in the UEFA cup if you played in the CL with another team. But you can play in the CL if you played in the UEFA cup. To me that isnt fair and is obviously put in place to favour the big teams.
Think about this then right. ok you pick 18 players for your sqaud. 10 players get either injured or sold after the 1st leg. What do you do in the 2nd leg, play only 8 players? Come on. Cambell wasnt in the team in the 1st leg but was init for the 2nd leg.
Woodgate, Gomes, Bent, Lennon Jenas all injured.
Do you not think it would be a little unfair if you had to play the same team in both legs?
spurs Babe
http://www.football-league.co.uk/staticFiles/4f/7a/0,,10794~96847,00.pdf
Here are the rules,find me the one that says he couldn't play,your going to have to jog on!
parklanebert
There is a rule regarding the (FA cup) that states"(h) In all Rounds of the Competition a player shall be a "registered player" of his Club under the Rules of the Competition. In the case of postponed, drawn or replayed matches only those players shall be allowed to play who were eligible to play at the time fixed for playing the original Round, except for under the provisions of Competition Rule 18(e)." there is NO such rule for the league cup and we have no case to answer.hope that clears that up.I think your people got their competitions mixed up!
parklanebert
they cant just add the rule into the CC now that the rules have been made.
I dalt we would of gone againest the rules like that. We would of made sure he could play. If we were gonna break rules then we would of done it in the FA cup and played Defoe.
spurs Babe
I had heard of this before this article and before the daily mirror one although it would be interesting where this ends up do we really want to go down that road?Time to move on promotion should be our priority
8clarets8
Lancashire Telegraph mainly supports Blackburn,so no surprise there and they have had many run ins with the Club. Look you can chuck stuff at me all day, I am only reporting what is happening (or appears to be happening) and the simple fact is that every club in our position would do exactly the same thing,including Spurs
turfmanphil
turfmanphil-read the rules and stop speculating rubbish.it looks as though your club want to add the rule for the future as theres not one now yet there is in the Fa cup. Sky said Burnley want clarification and are NOT making a complaint.you lost move on.
parklanebert
I think this article should hopefully put this to rest. Think its now time to move on.. We have a relegation battle to fight and you guys are fighting for promotion. I have no doubts we will seeing you at Turf moor again next season...In the Premiership. Good luck.
http://www.football-league.co.uk/page/News/CarlingCupNews/0,,10794~1533048,00.html
freddya
http://www.football-league.co.uk/page/News/CarlingCupNews/0,,10794~1533048,00.html
at last,just what I'd been telling you,now stop being a wally,you lost fair and square ,get a grip and move on ffs seriously losing the respect I had for you.good luck in the future and get that promotion!
parklanebert
http://www.football-league.co.uk/page/News/CarlingCupNews/0,,10794~1533048,00.html
the FL have read reports and have said on offical site that Defo was allowed to play in the game :)
spurs Babe
FFS I am reporting what might be happening and already given my thoughts on the matter and said I am not totally happy about it but understand why any club would do the same. You need to read what I am saying,not what you think I am saying
turfmanphil
LOL-turfmanphil,well the matter is closed anyway,good luck for the rest of the season,get promotion and have another run in the FA cup.Good luck mate.
parklanebert
Its repeating an article form the mirror not what we are saying!!Most of us don't want to go down that route as i have said promotion is what we must be focused on
8clarets8
well now its done. good luck on rest of season. And if you play Arsenal in the FA please beat them again lol.
spurs Babe
Who remembers Omiyimi being brought on to face Aston villa in the worthless for West Ham.....He was cup tied and West Ham were forced to play the game again and guess who the manager was at the time Harry Redknapp lol
Bubbleblower
Their are so many ridiculous comments from Spurs fans on here it is crazy. I cannot see anywhere any mention of any Burnley fans saying that Spurs should be kicked out etc etc. In fact, the comments appear to say we are not sure we would want to go through in that way. Yes we did lose - and however unlucky/undeserved it was - We are out! This is simply reporting the speculation!
Although to be honest - the comment about Spurs playing a weakend team in the second leg because of the socre in the first leg is the most laughable of the lot!
Claretdale
we played a weakened team because we couldn't do anything else, we had loads out with injuries,but who cares! Bubbleblower-get with the program Defoe WASN'T cup tied or ineligible!
parklanebert
correct parklane - The weakened team was down to injuries ( maybe a suspension too - I am not sure) and not because of the scoreline in the first leg as suggested by some above!
Claretdale
Clutching at straws I think but it'll be interesting to see if anything develops.
Ansdell Claret
I had a lot of respect for Burnley after their cup run. And a lot of sympathy after their defeat by Spurs. Well done in wiping that out in one fell swoop Burnley FC. And no, Spurs wouldn't try the same thing. I can't EVER recall a time we have tried to get a game replayed after losing it.
Yid Singer
Have Your Say
Recent Articles
Free Transfer for McCann and Others Leave! (Tuesday May 21 2013)
Tranmere is Fifth Summer Friendly! (Monday May 20 2013)
Rumour Mill-Jara to Reyes His Game at Turf Moor? (Saturday May 18 2013)
Heaton Rifles In To Sign Burnley Deal! (Friday May 17 2013)
Going North West for Two Further Friendlies! (Monday May 13 2013)
McCartan Goes-Why Don't the Club Shay Why? (Sunday May 12 2013)
Keeping the Heaton with Liversedge! (Saturday May 11 2013)
Clean Out or Wash Out? (Wednesday May 8 2013)
Burnley X-Files: Caldwell Out, Elliott In at Brum! (Wednesday May 8 2013)
Sparta at the Turf for pre-season friendly! (Wednesday May 8 2013)
Archived Articles
Vital Members League (view all)
| 1. | turfmanphil | 65 |
| 2. | Grimsby Claret | 30 |
| 3. | Couch Potato | 29 |
| 4. | 8clarets8 | 17 |
| 5. | cornwallclaret | 17 |
| 6. | VinRogue | 11 |
| 7. | Claretdale | 10 |
| 8. | RickersTwickers | 8 |
| 9. | WelshClaret | 7 |
| 10. | AndyHo | 5 |
League Results (view all)
| Latest Results | ||||
| Burnley | 2 | - | 0 | Ipswich |
| Wolves | 1 | - | 2 | Burnley |
| Burnley | 1 | - | 1 | Cardiff |
| Leeds Utd | 1 | - | 0 | Burnley |
| Blackpool | 1 | - | 0 | Burnley |
| Burnley | 3 | - | 1 | Bristol City |
League Table (view table)
| Team | P | W | D | L | GD | Pts |
| 8. Forest | 46 | 17 | 16 | 13 | 4 | 67 |
| 9. Charlton | 46 | 17 | 14 | 15 | 6 | 65 |
| 10. Derby County | 46 | 16 | 13 | 17 | 3 | 61 |
| 11. Burnley | 46 | 16 | 13 | 17 | 2 | 61 |
| 12. Birmingham | 46 | 15 | 16 | 15 | -6 | 61 |
| 13. Leeds Utd | 46 | 17 | 10 | 19 | -9 | 61 |
| 14. Ipswich | 46 | 16 | 12 | 18 | -13 | 60 |
Breaking League News
| LUFC Former defender retires
» Leeds Utd : 23/05/2013 21:54:00
|
| LUFC McDermott - Byram wants to stay
» Leeds Utd : 23/05/2013 20:34:00
|
| LUFC Capital One League Cup
» Leeds Utd : 23/05/2013 20:04:00
|
| Robinson keeping options open
» Blackburn : 23/05/2013 19:32:00
|
| Can Nottingham Forest Join The Elite?
» Forest : 23/05/2013 19:06:00
|
| Gus in Potters link as talk of successor escalates
» Brighton : 23/05/2013 17:43:00
|
| Manager Decision Not Imminent
» Millwall : 23/05/2013 17:12:00
|
Current Site Poll (view all polls)
|
|
2 © - All content copyright Vital Network Ltd, not to be reproduced without explicit permission Copyright Issues
Please note the Editorial comments and opinions on this site are the personal views of the Editor and should not be construed in any way to be representative of those of other Clarets organisations of which he belongs e.g. Clarets Trust. This applies to both the front page articles and posts in any of the forums.
Cookie Policy
At Vital Football, we along with most other modern websites use small files called 'cookies' to create the most secure, effective and functional website possible for our users. Without these files our business model, based on advertising, breaks down and we would be unable to continue to provide the services that you are here to utilise. By continuing to use this website after seeing this message, you consent to our use of cookies on this device unless you have disabled them. For full details please read our Cookie Policy which can be found here. However, if you would like to disable cookies on this device, please view our Cookie Policy which contains an opt-out tool for disabling advertising cookies. Please also visit our information pages on 'How to manage cookies' if you would also like to block all other types of cookies. Please be aware that parts of this site will not function correctly if you disable cookies.