Looking at the original thread on KDS, it appears that the OP on here has neglected to include the, "So who was this? Got it sent to me by a friend." bit at the very top.
http://kerrydalestreet.co.uk/topic/8552093/404/
It seems that the poster on there was only quoting what he had been sent rather than send it himself. It was also posted this morning even though the rumours about this have been doing the rounds since last Friday.
Sneaky.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Curly... they are confusing 'registration', 'eligibility' and 'Visas'.
TCD is thicker than most, so you sometimes have to persevere with him. He gets it eventually. You'll know when, though. He'll simply disappear.
Just wondering. Is referring to Rangers supporters as "rhymes with buns" not sectarian /illegal? Perhaps "FARE" and the catolic church aught to look into this?
HAhahahaha, so the word I was rhyming is banned from this website.....says it all.
Just how persistently STUPID can onje person be?!!!
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
It's not MY rule
Have you actually read the rule 18.14????
It states, that the player must be eligible to play domestically, for him/her to be registered for the Uefa tournament....
That was clearly not the case thus, Bocamegra missed Sundays game. Even you lot can understand that...
Despite this being post 109
I work in a country that you need a visa to get into and had the same issue
+++++
When did you enter Uefa's regulations...you tart
"It states, that the player must be eligible to play domestically, for him/her to be registered for the Uefa tournament...."
Jessy.. what constitutes 'eligible'?
Naw you tell me...cause I know what it means.
My son just went to America on a soccer scholarship...without his VISA, he would have been ineligible to do so
TCD
He WAS eligble to play and completed all criteria required by the SFA
He didnt have a visa which is not the concern of the SFA at least when I apply for one I dont even tell them should I?
Jessy.. what constitutes 'eligible'?
______________________
That's what worries me Ishamael tbh.
It's open to interpretation and UEFA hate us it seems. Also, due to the fact UEFA use Roman Law whereby they judge on each case on a case to case basis and previous decisions mean nothing we are on thin ground I think. It's 50/50, as to which way it will go.
My son just went to America on a soccer scholarship...without his VISA, he would have been ineligible to do so
====
No mate he is obvioulsy eligble or he wouldnt have been given a place
Its up to him to get a Visa nothing to do with football authorities
"Naw you tell me...cause I know what it means."
I don't think you do, son.
"My son just went to America on a soccer scholarship...without his VISA, he would have been ineligible to do so"
Yeah... like that's a direct comparison!
jeeeze guys
he is eliglbe to play even if he never gets an fn visa....
every time we play outside the UK that is.
He WAS eligble to play and completed all criteria required by the SFA
+++++
Come on, Duke...if he filled ALL the criteria, he would have been ELLIGIBLE to play on Sunday...he wasn't.
I stated earlier on and I'll say it again, I do not know if not having a Visa would be enough to disqualify the player.All I am saying is; the rule clearly states the player had to eligible domestically to be registered for the Maribor game...it doesn't go into great detail but, Bocanegra was not eligible to play in Scotland last Thursday nor last Sunday...
Its up to him to get a Visa nothing to do with football authorities
++++
We are not questioning who's responsibility it is here...it's eligibility
"Bocanegra was not eligible to play in Scotland last Thursday nor last Sunday"
Yes he was.
You... and your fellow Dhimms are creaming your pants whilst not actually knowing there is a difference between a work permit and a work visa.
TCD
He couldnt get in to the country
Thats not down to the SFA he we want to pay a player who cant enter the UK then daft as it would be we can.
He has ticked ALL the boxes as far as the SFA are concerned.
So he was eligble to play in Scotland as far as the SFA have stated.
He just couldnt get over the border which is not the sfa problem.
If we want to waste our money paying a guy with no visa then fine.
Strange example.
Joey Barton was eliglble to play in a recent tour of the USA but couldnt get a visa due his criminal record.
He couldnt enter the country but WAS eligble to play
We are not questioning who's responsibility it is here...it's eligibility
=====
correct and he was eligble
Here Jessy... away and amuse yourself.
http://www. workpermit .com/uk/employee2.htm
(take out spaces)
Simplified for the Bear:
1.Did player have work permit-Yes
2.Did player have Visa-No
3.Did the Fact, that the player having no Visa, made him ineligible for last weekends domestic game at Motherwell-Yes
4.Does the Uefa ruling state that players must be eligible domestically to play in their competitions-no matter if that tie takes place out with the domain of said players club-Yes
5.Are Rangers fekt...I honestly do not know as there may be other rules stating that Visas etc...are not deemed as important as work permits.
"3.Did the Fact, that the player having no Visa, made him ineligible for last weekends domestic game at Motherwell-Yes"
No it didn't.
It made him UNABLE... not INELIGIBLE
Sign in if you want to comment
pathetic!
Page 5 of 9
6 | 7 | 8 | 9
posted on 23/8/11
Looking at the original thread on KDS, it appears that the OP on here has neglected to include the, "So who was this? Got it sent to me by a friend." bit at the very top.
http://kerrydalestreet.co.uk/topic/8552093/404/
It seems that the poster on there was only quoting what he had been sent rather than send it himself. It was also posted this morning even though the rumours about this have been doing the rounds since last Friday.
Sneaky.
posted on 23/8/11
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 23/8/11
Curly... they are confusing 'registration', 'eligibility' and 'Visas'.
TCD is thicker than most, so you sometimes have to persevere with him. He gets it eventually. You'll know when, though. He'll simply disappear.
posted on 23/8/11
Just wondering. Is referring to Rangers supporters as "rhymes with buns" not sectarian /illegal? Perhaps "FARE" and the catolic church aught to look into this?
posted on 23/8/11
HAhahahaha, so the word I was rhyming is banned from this website.....says it all.
posted on 23/8/11
Just how persistently STUPID can onje person be?!!!
posted on 23/8/11
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 23/8/11
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 23/8/11
It's not MY rule
Have you actually read the rule 18.14????
It states, that the player must be eligible to play domestically, for him/her to be registered for the Uefa tournament....
That was clearly not the case thus, Bocamegra missed Sundays game. Even you lot can understand that...
Despite this being post 109
posted on 23/8/11
I work in a country that you need a visa to get into and had the same issue
+++++
When did you enter Uefa's regulations...you tart
posted on 23/8/11
"It states, that the player must be eligible to play domestically, for him/her to be registered for the Uefa tournament...."
Jessy.. what constitutes 'eligible'?
posted on 23/8/11
Naw you tell me...cause I know what it means.
My son just went to America on a soccer scholarship...without his VISA, he would have been ineligible to do so
posted on 23/8/11
TCD
He WAS eligble to play and completed all criteria required by the SFA
He didnt have a visa which is not the concern of the SFA at least when I apply for one I dont even tell them should I?
posted on 23/8/11
Jessy.. what constitutes 'eligible'?
______________________
That's what worries me Ishamael tbh.
It's open to interpretation and UEFA hate us it seems. Also, due to the fact UEFA use Roman Law whereby they judge on each case on a case to case basis and previous decisions mean nothing we are on thin ground I think. It's 50/50, as to which way it will go.
posted on 23/8/11
My son just went to America on a soccer scholarship...without his VISA, he would have been ineligible to do so
====
No mate he is obvioulsy eligble or he wouldnt have been given a place
Its up to him to get a Visa nothing to do with football authorities
posted on 23/8/11
"Naw you tell me...cause I know what it means."
I don't think you do, son.
"My son just went to America on a soccer scholarship...without his VISA, he would have been ineligible to do so"
Yeah... like that's a direct comparison!
posted on 23/8/11
jeeeze guys
he is eliglbe to play even if he never gets an fn visa....
every time we play outside the UK that is.
posted on 23/8/11
He WAS eligble to play and completed all criteria required by the SFA
+++++
Come on, Duke...if he filled ALL the criteria, he would have been ELLIGIBLE to play on Sunday...he wasn't.
I stated earlier on and I'll say it again, I do not know if not having a Visa would be enough to disqualify the player.All I am saying is; the rule clearly states the player had to eligible domestically to be registered for the Maribor game...it doesn't go into great detail but, Bocanegra was not eligible to play in Scotland last Thursday nor last Sunday...
posted on 23/8/11
Its up to him to get a Visa nothing to do with football authorities
++++
We are not questioning who's responsibility it is here...it's eligibility
posted on 23/8/11
"Bocanegra was not eligible to play in Scotland last Thursday nor last Sunday"
Yes he was.
You... and your fellow Dhimms are creaming your pants whilst not actually knowing there is a difference between a work permit and a work visa.
posted on 23/8/11
TCD
He couldnt get in to the country
Thats not down to the SFA he we want to pay a player who cant enter the UK then daft as it would be we can.
He has ticked ALL the boxes as far as the SFA are concerned.
So he was eligble to play in Scotland as far as the SFA have stated.
He just couldnt get over the border which is not the sfa problem.
If we want to waste our money paying a guy with no visa then fine.
Strange example.
Joey Barton was eliglble to play in a recent tour of the USA but couldnt get a visa due his criminal record.
He couldnt enter the country but WAS eligble to play
posted on 23/8/11
We are not questioning who's responsibility it is here...it's eligibility
=====
correct and he was eligble
posted on 23/8/11
Here Jessy... away and amuse yourself.
http://www. workpermit .com/uk/employee2.htm
(take out spaces)
posted on 23/8/11
Simplified for the Bear:
1.Did player have work permit-Yes
2.Did player have Visa-No
3.Did the Fact, that the player having no Visa, made him ineligible for last weekends domestic game at Motherwell-Yes
4.Does the Uefa ruling state that players must be eligible domestically to play in their competitions-no matter if that tie takes place out with the domain of said players club-Yes
5.Are Rangers fekt...I honestly do not know as there may be other rules stating that Visas etc...are not deemed as important as work permits.
posted on 23/8/11
"3.Did the Fact, that the player having no Visa, made him ineligible for last weekends domestic game at Motherwell-Yes"
No it didn't.
It made him UNABLE... not INELIGIBLE
Page 5 of 9
6 | 7 | 8 | 9