Lawn hoping Bantams will be reinstated in FA Cup on appeal after branding decision 'too harsh'

Blair Turgott congratulates James Hanson on scoring City’s equaliser in the FA Cup draw against Brentford last Friday

Blair Turgott congratulates James Hanson on scoring City’s equaliser in the FA Cup draw against Brentford last Friday

First published in Bantams Bradford Telegraph and Argus: Photograph of the Author by , Bradford Bulls Reporter

Mark Lawn last night revealed that City had appealed against being booted out of the FA Cup because they feel the “punishment does not fit the crime”.

The Bantams were left stunned yesterday after being thrown out of the famous old knockout competition for fielding an ineligible player in their second-round tie against Brentford last Friday.

The club did not receive written permission for Curtis Good, on loan from Newcastle, to play in the competition by the 12pm deadline on the day of the fixture, which ended 1-1 at Valley Parade.

Yet City decided to lodge an appeal before yesterday’s 5pm deadline and their case will be heard by the Football Association in London on Monday.

It remains to be seen what hope the Bantams have of winning their appeal but joint-chairman Lawn told the T&A: “Obviously if we are appealing then we don’t agree with the FA’s decision.

“We do not think the punishment fits the crime and we believe we have a good right to appeal.

“We will have to go into that appeal and see how the FA responds to why we think the punishment is too harsh.”

If City are unsuccessful, Brentford would progress to the third round to play Bury or Southend.

An earlier FA statement had read: “The FA has confirmed that Bradford City have been removed from the FA Cup with Budweiser 2012-13 competition after fielding an ineligible player in their second-round tie against Brentford.”

City admitted the error was “of an administrative technical nature” and apologised to their fans.

The Bantams were the only side left in three domestic cup competitions and face Premier League giants Arsenal in the quarter-finals of the Capital One Cup on Tuesday.

Before the appeal was announced, Brentford chief executive Mark Devlin admitted he had sympathy with Bradford and would have preferred to have advanced in the competition another way.

He said: “It is not a satisfactory way to progress. We would much rather progress by winning a match but the FA have made their decision.

“The first we heard of anything was on Monday afternoon and internally we just held off before putting tickets out for sale for the replay and just waited for the FA’s decision from yesterday’s committee hearing.

“It is the FA’s competition and the FA make the rules which we all know about. Whether we feel sympathetic or not does not come into play really.

“It is the FA’s decision. I do have some sympathies with Bradford.

“It is entirely a matter for the FA and Bradford City Football Club. I don’t think we will be asked to get involved any further at this stage.”

Good, meanwhile, could line up for City in today’s League Two encounter at home to Torquay United.

It is understood that there are no problems relating to Good’s participation in Tuesday’s Johnstone’s Paint Trophy victory at Port Vale.

Likewise, he is eligible to play against Arsenal on Tuesday in the Capital One Cup.

Bury and Droylsden were kicked out of the Cup, in 2006 and 2008 respectively, for fielding ineligible players, with both clubs losing their appeals.

Comments (19)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

8:28am Sat 8 Dec 12

tyker2 says...

I said elsewhere that the sentence handed out seemed harsh in relelation to the offence .

Other clubs were excluded from the competition, I believe, on simply NOT registering a player NOR attempting to do so there is no precedent in those two cases.

Are there any precedents for a case similar to that which arises here. I think not and,on that basis the ruling has to be challenged despite the costs involved.

There has to be natural justice in all cases and,on this basis, I feel a ban is excessive. A fine fine is more apposite.
I said elsewhere that the sentence handed out seemed harsh in relelation to the offence . Other clubs were excluded from the competition, I believe, on simply NOT registering a player NOR attempting to do so there is no precedent in those two cases. Are there any precedents for a case similar to that which arises here. I think not and,on that basis the ruling has to be challenged despite the costs involved. There has to be natural justice in all cases and,on this basis, I feel a ban is excessive. A fine fine is more apposite. tyker2
  • Score: 0

9:05am Sat 8 Dec 12

silverbantam says...

A football league club secretary is a specialised job, yet City's has no previous experience of the job, hence this massive ****-up.

In the past we have had Jon Pollard and Shaun Harvey but now the program editor does it to cut costs.
A football league club secretary is a specialised job, yet City's has no previous experience of the job, hence this massive ****-up. In the past we have had Jon Pollard and Shaun Harvey but now the program editor does it to cut costs. silverbantam
  • Score: 0

9:25am Sat 8 Dec 12

Freddy says...

*
When it appears to be an administrative error. The Fa must be aware of that obvious error. An Application was in progress and being progressed, and will have been seen by the FA.
*
So WHY has the FA gone for the maximum very harsh decision --to remove the Club from the FA Cup Competition?.--When, with this information available and pending, a fine would have been more appropriate in the first instance.
*
The Autocratic FA, and its controllers, --may have more, or another reason, for this expulsion of Bradford City.
*
I hope the Team that plays today, will get the win that we now wholeheartedly deserve.
*
* When it appears to be an administrative error. The Fa must be aware of that obvious error. An Application was in progress and being progressed, and will have been seen by the FA. * So WHY has the FA gone for the maximum very harsh decision --to remove the Club from the FA Cup Competition?.--When, with this information available and pending, a fine would have been more appropriate in the first instance. * The Autocratic FA, and its controllers, --may have more, or another reason, for this expulsion of Bradford City. * I hope the Team that plays today, will get the win that we now wholeheartedly deserve. * Freddy
  • Score: 0

10:24am Sat 8 Dec 12

macca1969 says...

We won't succeed in changing the FA decision. It will be a waste of time and money as it won't be cheap. Just move on and retire from the comp undefeated the FA does not take kindly to being challenged
We won't succeed in changing the FA decision. It will be a waste of time and money as it won't be cheap. Just move on and retire from the comp undefeated the FA does not take kindly to being challenged macca1969
  • Score: 0

12:20pm Sat 8 Dec 12

bcfc1903 says...

I don't know the details of whats gone on but the club must feel that the penalty doesn't fit the crime...I'd be on the side of the club in appealling the decision...i guess there's a small chance of the FA giving club a fine instead but i fancy BCFC will not succeed and be excluded from the FA Cup.. Looking for positives if that happens...obviously it will give our never say die squad a much needed break before the key league games over Christmas and New Year.

**
We shout with pride...we'll never hide...Claret and Amber.
I don't know the details of whats gone on but the club must feel that the penalty doesn't fit the crime...I'd be on the side of the club in appealling the decision...i guess there's a small chance of the FA giving club a fine instead but i fancy BCFC will not succeed and be excluded from the FA Cup.. Looking for positives if that happens...obviously it will give our never say die squad a much needed break before the key league games over Christmas and New Year. ** We shout with pride...we'll never hide...Claret and Amber. bcfc1903
  • Score: 0

12:47pm Sat 8 Dec 12

cookie_brighton says...

I think the punishment is harsh, as many have posted, a fine would have been suffice, but that is coming from us....B.C.F.C. supporters.
We needed loanees in to cover for injuries to players, the f.a. were aware of this, it would be obvious that loanees would be playing in cup games.
To have permission from a loanees club for them to play in a cup game in my opinion is outdated, when a player is taken on at any club, he or she should be allowed to play any game, from the day of signing.
I hope the appeal is successful and the punishment is a fine, but, I feel we will get F.A. from the F.A.
I think the punishment is harsh, as many have posted, a fine would have been suffice, but that is coming from us....B.C.F.C. supporters. We needed loanees in to cover for injuries to players, the f.a. were aware of this, it would be obvious that loanees would be playing in cup games. To have permission from a loanees club for them to play in a cup game in my opinion is outdated, when a player is taken on at any club, he or she should be allowed to play any game, from the day of signing. I hope the appeal is successful and the punishment is a fine, but, I feel we will get F.A. from the F.A. cookie_brighton
  • Score: 0

12:49pm Sat 8 Dec 12

cookie_brighton says...

ctid
ctid cookie_brighton
  • Score: 0

12:54pm Sat 8 Dec 12

PaddyBantam says...

To be honest i can't see the FA going back on the call they have already made and so be it. It would be a lot harder to accept if this was in relation to Tuesday's game - that would hurt. We play Tuesday, we are doing well in the JPT - even if it is a Mickey Mouse cup. Would you rather a day at Wembley in the JPT or two away trips in the FA cup? Chances of winning the FA cup are slim! So lets focus on what we may be able to win - Tuesday, JPT and automatic promotion - that would be a good season for me!!
To be honest i can't see the FA going back on the call they have already made and so be it. It would be a lot harder to accept if this was in relation to Tuesday's game - that would hurt. We play Tuesday, we are doing well in the JPT - even if it is a Mickey Mouse cup. Would you rather a day at Wembley in the JPT or two away trips in the FA cup? Chances of winning the FA cup are slim! So lets focus on what we may be able to win - Tuesday, JPT and automatic promotion - that would be a good season for me!! PaddyBantam
  • Score: 0

1:19pm Sat 8 Dec 12

Bantam sthn Ellatha says...

If I recollect, didn't West Ham do the same 'crime' some years back and were ordered to replay their game - not thrown out?

If so it's seems to be one rule for the rich and one for the poor.
That doesn't excuse the silly error on City's part though and someone at the club should be fearing for his/her job.
If I recollect, didn't West Ham do the same 'crime' some years back and were ordered to replay their game - not thrown out? If so it's seems to be one rule for the rich and one for the poor. That doesn't excuse the silly error on City's part though and someone at the club should be fearing for his/her job. Bantam sthn Ellatha
  • Score: 0

4:02pm Sat 8 Dec 12

Whoisevans? says...

I also remember one or two premier clubs who didn't complete papers before the deadline in the last transfer window yet they still went ahead, simple answer being money.
I also remember one or two premier clubs who didn't complete papers before the deadline in the last transfer window yet they still went ahead, simple answer being money. Whoisevans?
  • Score: 0

6:05pm Sat 8 Dec 12

340stopper says...

Bantam sthn Ellatha wrote:
If I recollect, didn't West Ham do the same 'crime' some years back and were ordered to replay their game - not thrown out? If so it's seems to be one rule for the rich and one for the poor. That doesn't excuse the silly error on City's part though and someone at the club should be fearing for his/her job.
Whilst it would appear to be city's "silly error", making somebody the scapegoat for it won't help, far better we move on and learn to be more professional in the future and ensure we never make the same mistake again.
After all of last season's numerous loan deals we should have had a clear understanding of the rules by now.
Thank our lucky stars it wasn't the Arsenal game that was lost with all the ramifications that would have meant !
[quote][p][bold]Bantam sthn Ellatha[/bold] wrote: If I recollect, didn't West Ham do the same 'crime' some years back and were ordered to replay their game - not thrown out? If so it's seems to be one rule for the rich and one for the poor. That doesn't excuse the silly error on City's part though and someone at the club should be fearing for his/her job.[/p][/quote]Whilst it would appear to be city's "silly error", making somebody the scapegoat for it won't help, far better we move on and learn to be more professional in the future and ensure we never make the same mistake again. After all of last season's numerous loan deals we should have had a clear understanding of the rules by now. Thank our lucky stars it wasn't the Arsenal game that was lost with all the ramifications that would have meant ! 340stopper
  • Score: 0

6:59pm Sat 8 Dec 12

lonniejockstrap says...

Bantam sthn Ellatha wrote:
If I recollect, didn't West Ham do the same 'crime' some years back and were ordered to replay their game - not thrown out?

If so it's seems to be one rule for the rich and one for the poor.
That doesn't excuse the silly error on City's part though and someone at the club should be fearing for his/her job.
The staff down at VP have been doing a fantastic job and a number of them doing it for nowt. They have been under a lot of extra pressure with the extra arrangements required for the Arsenal game. If more City fans were prepared to help out and ease the workload I am sure it would be appreciated by the Chairmen and board members. Mistakes occur from time to time in every business and in life in general. If someone makes an honest mistake has the right attitude and is committed to the cause then there should be no reason for them to fear for their job. And that should apply whether they get paid well, get paid peanuts or do the job for free in my opinion. The individual responsible will feel crappy enough about it anyway implying they should be sacked.
[quote][p][bold]Bantam sthn Ellatha[/bold] wrote: If I recollect, didn't West Ham do the same 'crime' some years back and were ordered to replay their game - not thrown out? If so it's seems to be one rule for the rich and one for the poor. That doesn't excuse the silly error on City's part though and someone at the club should be fearing for his/her job.[/p][/quote]The staff down at VP have been doing a fantastic job and a number of them doing it for nowt. They have been under a lot of extra pressure with the extra arrangements required for the Arsenal game. If more City fans were prepared to help out and ease the workload I am sure it would be appreciated by the Chairmen and board members. Mistakes occur from time to time in every business and in life in general. If someone makes an honest mistake has the right attitude and is committed to the cause then there should be no reason for them to fear for their job. And that should apply whether they get paid well, get paid peanuts or do the job for free in my opinion. The individual responsible will feel crappy enough about it anyway implying they should be sacked. lonniejockstrap
  • Score: 0

7:01pm Sat 8 Dec 12

lonniejockstrap says...

lonniejockstrap wrote:
Bantam sthn Ellatha wrote:
If I recollect, didn't West Ham do the same 'crime' some years back and were ordered to replay their game - not thrown out?

If so it's seems to be one rule for the rich and one for the poor.
That doesn't excuse the silly error on City's part though and someone at the club should be fearing for his/her job.
The staff down at VP have been doing a fantastic job and a number of them doing it for nowt. They have been under a lot of extra pressure with the extra arrangements required for the Arsenal game. If more City fans were prepared to help out and ease the workload I am sure it would be appreciated by the Chairmen and board members. Mistakes occur from time to time in every business and in life in general. If someone makes an honest mistake has the right attitude and is committed to the cause then there should be no reason for them to fear for their job. And that should apply whether they get paid well, get paid peanuts or do the job for free in my opinion. The individual responsible will feel crappy enough about it anyway implying they should be sacked.
Should have read: 'without anyone implying they should be sacked'
[quote][p][bold]lonniejockstrap[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Bantam sthn Ellatha[/bold] wrote: If I recollect, didn't West Ham do the same 'crime' some years back and were ordered to replay their game - not thrown out? If so it's seems to be one rule for the rich and one for the poor. That doesn't excuse the silly error on City's part though and someone at the club should be fearing for his/her job.[/p][/quote]The staff down at VP have been doing a fantastic job and a number of them doing it for nowt. They have been under a lot of extra pressure with the extra arrangements required for the Arsenal game. If more City fans were prepared to help out and ease the workload I am sure it would be appreciated by the Chairmen and board members. Mistakes occur from time to time in every business and in life in general. If someone makes an honest mistake has the right attitude and is committed to the cause then there should be no reason for them to fear for their job. And that should apply whether they get paid well, get paid peanuts or do the job for free in my opinion. The individual responsible will feel crappy enough about it anyway implying they should be sacked.[/p][/quote]Should have read: 'without anyone implying they should be sacked' lonniejockstrap
  • Score: 0

7:28pm Sat 8 Dec 12

bcfc1903 says...

lonniejockstrap wrote:
Bantam sthn Ellatha wrote:
If I recollect, didn't West Ham do the same 'crime' some years back and were ordered to replay their game - not thrown out?

If so it's seems to be one rule for the rich and one for the poor.
That doesn't excuse the silly error on City's part though and someone at the club should be fearing for his/her job.
The staff down at VP have been doing a fantastic job and a number of them doing it for nowt. They have been under a lot of extra pressure with the extra arrangements required for the Arsenal game. If more City fans were prepared to help out and ease the workload I am sure it would be appreciated by the Chairmen and board members. Mistakes occur from time to time in every business and in life in general. If someone makes an honest mistake has the right attitude and is committed to the cause then there should be no reason for them to fear for their job. And that should apply whether they get paid well, get paid peanuts or do the job for free in my opinion. The individual responsible will feel crappy enough about it anyway implying they should be sacked.
Spot on as usual lonnie...agree with every bit of your post!!!

**
Great result today, brilliant strike by Connell...well done to everyone involved including some brilliant support from the BCFC fans.....Bring on the Arsenal!!!!

**
We shout with pride ...we'll never hide....Claret and Amber.
[quote][p][bold]lonniejockstrap[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Bantam sthn Ellatha[/bold] wrote: If I recollect, didn't West Ham do the same 'crime' some years back and were ordered to replay their game - not thrown out? If so it's seems to be one rule for the rich and one for the poor. That doesn't excuse the silly error on City's part though and someone at the club should be fearing for his/her job.[/p][/quote]The staff down at VP have been doing a fantastic job and a number of them doing it for nowt. They have been under a lot of extra pressure with the extra arrangements required for the Arsenal game. If more City fans were prepared to help out and ease the workload I am sure it would be appreciated by the Chairmen and board members. Mistakes occur from time to time in every business and in life in general. If someone makes an honest mistake has the right attitude and is committed to the cause then there should be no reason for them to fear for their job. And that should apply whether they get paid well, get paid peanuts or do the job for free in my opinion. The individual responsible will feel crappy enough about it anyway implying they should be sacked.[/p][/quote]Spot on as usual lonnie...agree with every bit of your post!!! ** Great result today, brilliant strike by Connell...well done to everyone involved including some brilliant support from the BCFC fans.....Bring on the Arsenal!!!! ** We shout with pride ...we'll never hide....Claret and Amber. bcfc1903
  • Score: 0

10:45pm Sat 8 Dec 12

undercliffebantam says...

You cant beat the fa, ask any Sunday league secretary. Somebodies got to pay for their cup final tickets.
You cant beat the fa, ask any Sunday league secretary. Somebodies got to pay for their cup final tickets. undercliffebantam
  • Score: 0

3:49am Sun 9 Dec 12

PaddyBantam says...

silverbantam wrote:
A football league club secretary is a specialised job, yet City's has no previous experience of the job, hence this massive ****-up.

In the past we have had Jon Pollard and Shaun Harvey but now the program editor does it to cut costs.
You obviously had my post removed because i touched a nerve, so i'll repeat again. You are obviously one of those thats buys a cheap season ticket and thinks that it gives you the right to then dig the club out for the next 9 months - not satisfied with trying to slander the lady at the club for the admin error of which you have no proof, your back again, aside from digging JR out on another thread. What a negative individual you are, all to willing to point out the negatives, no matter how small. I'd rather burn my season ticket than have to sir next or near you for a full season. Ask the club for a refund on your season ticket, the club are better off without 'supporters' like you and i use the word supporter in your case in the loosest possible term - can you actually back up any of your pathetic claims. I'd hazard a guess your 5ft 4in or under, there has to be some reason for that massive chip your carry around, i can only assume its because you suffer from small man syndrome - one sad individual.
[quote][p][bold]silverbantam[/bold] wrote: A football league club secretary is a specialised job, yet City's has no previous experience of the job, hence this massive ****-up. In the past we have had Jon Pollard and Shaun Harvey but now the program editor does it to cut costs.[/p][/quote]You obviously had my post removed because i touched a nerve, so i'll repeat again. You are obviously one of those thats buys a cheap season ticket and thinks that it gives you the right to then dig the club out for the next 9 months - not satisfied with trying to slander the lady at the club for the admin error of which you have no proof, your back again, aside from digging JR out on another thread. What a negative individual you are, all to willing to point out the negatives, no matter how small. I'd rather burn my season ticket than have to sir next or near you for a full season. Ask the club for a refund on your season ticket, the club are better off without 'supporters' like you and i use the word supporter in your case in the loosest possible term - can you actually back up any of your pathetic claims. I'd hazard a guess your 5ft 4in or under, there has to be some reason for that massive chip your carry around, i can only assume its because you suffer from small man syndrome - one sad individual. PaddyBantam
  • Score: 0

3:49am Sun 9 Dec 12

PaddyBantam says...

silverbantam wrote:
A football league club secretary is a specialised job, yet City's has no previous experience of the job, hence this massive ****-up.

In the past we have had Jon Pollard and Shaun Harvey but now the program editor does it to cut costs.
You obviously had my post removed because i touched a nerve, so i'll repeat again. You are obviously one of those thats buys a cheap season ticket and thinks that it gives you the right to then dig the club out for the next 9 months - not satisfied with trying to slander the lady at the club for the admin error of which you have no proof, your back again, aside from digging JR out on another thread. What a negative individual you are, all to willing to point out the negatives, no matter how small. I'd rather burn my season ticket than have to sir next or near you for a full season. Ask the club for a refund on your season ticket, the club are better off without 'supporters' like you and i use the word supporter in your case in the loosest possible term - can you actually back up any of your pathetic claims. I'd hazard a guess your 5ft 4in or under, there has to be some reason for that massive chip your carry around, i can only assume its because you suffer from small man syndrome - one sad individual.
[quote][p][bold]silverbantam[/bold] wrote: A football league club secretary is a specialised job, yet City's has no previous experience of the job, hence this massive ****-up. In the past we have had Jon Pollard and Shaun Harvey but now the program editor does it to cut costs.[/p][/quote]You obviously had my post removed because i touched a nerve, so i'll repeat again. You are obviously one of those thats buys a cheap season ticket and thinks that it gives you the right to then dig the club out for the next 9 months - not satisfied with trying to slander the lady at the club for the admin error of which you have no proof, your back again, aside from digging JR out on another thread. What a negative individual you are, all to willing to point out the negatives, no matter how small. I'd rather burn my season ticket than have to sir next or near you for a full season. Ask the club for a refund on your season ticket, the club are better off without 'supporters' like you and i use the word supporter in your case in the loosest possible term - can you actually back up any of your pathetic claims. I'd hazard a guess your 5ft 4in or under, there has to be some reason for that massive chip your carry around, i can only assume its because you suffer from small man syndrome - one sad individual. PaddyBantam
  • Score: 0

12:46pm Sun 9 Dec 12

Tinybantam says...

cookie_brighton wrote:
I think the punishment is harsh, as many have posted, a fine would have been suffice, but that is coming from us....B.C.F.C. supporters.
We needed loanees in to cover for injuries to players, the f.a. were aware of this, it would be obvious that loanees would be playing in cup games.
To have permission from a loanees club for them to play in a cup game in my opinion is outdated, when a player is taken on at any club, he or she should be allowed to play any game, from the day of signing.
I hope the appeal is successful and the punishment is a fine, but, I feel we will get F.A. from the F.A.
The reason that the club which is loaning the player out, in this case Newcastle, do not want their player cup-tied should they require him to play, after his loan has ended at City. It is not an out-dated law, but a very reasonable one, and the rules state that a player cannot play for more than one club, in a seasons competition. If the player was on a season long loan, with no recall clause, then that would be a different matter, because the player would not be available to his parent club.
[quote][p][bold]cookie_brighton[/bold] wrote: I think the punishment is harsh, as many have posted, a fine would have been suffice, but that is coming from us....B.C.F.C. supporters. We needed loanees in to cover for injuries to players, the f.a. were aware of this, it would be obvious that loanees would be playing in cup games. To have permission from a loanees club for them to play in a cup game in my opinion is outdated, when a player is taken on at any club, he or she should be allowed to play any game, from the day of signing. I hope the appeal is successful and the punishment is a fine, but, I feel we will get F.A. from the F.A.[/p][/quote]The reason that the club which is loaning the player out, in this case Newcastle, do not want their player cup-tied should they require him to play, after his loan has ended at City. It is not an out-dated law, but a very reasonable one, and the rules state that a player cannot play for more than one club, in a seasons competition. If the player was on a season long loan, with no recall clause, then that would be a different matter, because the player would not be available to his parent club. Tinybantam
  • Score: 0

1:56pm Sun 9 Dec 12

Whoisevans? says...

I assume City have now received permission for Good to play in the Cup games? If so what took so long to get permission I know it's a long way to Newcastle but surely they have a fax machine?
I assume City have now received permission for Good to play in the Cup games? If so what took so long to get permission I know it's a long way to Newcastle but surely they have a fax machine? Whoisevans?
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree