Belfast Haven't Broken the EIHL Roster Rules......because...
- Thread starter Finny
- Start date
Thread starter
#22
Cullen was scratched by Keefe before warm-up. For some reason the Belfast off-ice team didn’t remove him. Either before, during, or after the game.
For the benefit of the Belfast fans/oddballs reading and screen-shotting this thread, this is what happens:
-The league set the initial line-ups. These are then tweeted by the league.
-The league informs the clubs of any changes.
-The club’s off-ice team make changes to the line-up.
For the benefit of the Belfast fans/oddballs reading and screen-shotting this thread, this is what happens:
-The league set the initial line-ups. These are then tweeted by the league.
-The league informs the clubs of any changes.
-The club’s off-ice team make changes to the line-up.
Thread starter
#24
Really thought that this would be the week that we would find out the answer.....but it would appear not.
The silence from the league is bizarre, and starting to get concerning. This time last year when there were questions over Sheffield breaking the roster rules the league couldn't respond quick enough to fans queries online to explain it.
This year..... nothing.
Now, I know that it might be a bit presumptuous of me as a fan to expect a reply and explanation. But when journalists are asking the league for clarification you would expect a reply from them.
Bob Westerdale has confirmed that he has been asking the league for clarification on the rules but as of this morning has been completely ignored so far.
This is a really bad look. It suggests that the league are hiding something. Which worryingly would fit the rumours I've been told by several people.
Up until last weekend you could conceivably have argued that Belfast were switching players on IRL around and McLeod was covering all of them. Which whilst strictly not in the rules, the wording doesn't specifically rule it out.
However, this would mean that Eriksson was the latest player on IRL. But he returned last weekend and even if they had backdated it the maximum number of days he could have been on IR was 20. Less than the minimum 21.
Hopefully there is a simple explanation that I am still missing. Else it would seem that by Hook or by crook the Giants are so desperate to win back-to-back league titles they are willing to win by any means necessary. :sad:
The silence from the league is bizarre, and starting to get concerning. This time last year when there were questions over Sheffield breaking the roster rules the league couldn't respond quick enough to fans queries online to explain it.
This year..... nothing.
Now, I know that it might be a bit presumptuous of me as a fan to expect a reply and explanation. But when journalists are asking the league for clarification you would expect a reply from them.
Bob Westerdale has confirmed that he has been asking the league for clarification on the rules but as of this morning has been completely ignored so far.
This is a really bad look. It suggests that the league are hiding something. Which worryingly would fit the rumours I've been told by several people.
Up until last weekend you could conceivably have argued that Belfast were switching players on IRL around and McLeod was covering all of them. Which whilst strictly not in the rules, the wording doesn't specifically rule it out.
However, this would mean that Eriksson was the latest player on IRL. But he returned last weekend and even if they had backdated it the maximum number of days he could have been on IR was 20. Less than the minimum 21.
Hopefully there is a simple explanation that I am still missing. Else it would seem that by Hook or by crook the Giants are so desperate to win back-to-back league titles they are willing to win by any means necessary. :sad:
Just to clarify, in not suggesting that there is corruption. That is strong language to use without direct proof. I do however agree, if proven, that the only proper penalty for breaching rules is to remove the benefits - IE strip the challenge cup, 20 point reduction in the league and kicked out of the playoffs.
So, up until now, the general consensus appears to be that Todd, Tony Hand,Paul Dixon, Aaron Fox, 3of the 4 clubs chasing a league title , are staying silent over a rival club allegedly breaking the rules. Why would any club owner do that? They took points,and a financial fine from the giants when the arena made a booking for another artist and cancelled the Sheffield game at very short notice.
The right thing to do.
If you were Paul Dixon, or the owners of Guildford, possibly 4 points away from a historic league cup, can you believe they would be sitting on their hands and saying nothing..
We always say the reaction of players on the ice to a hit will always give a good indication if that hit was bad. Nothing from the league or club owners would certainly give the impression that nothing untoward has occurred.
The right thing to do.
If you were Paul Dixon, or the owners of Guildford, possibly 4 points away from a historic league cup, can you believe they would be sitting on their hands and saying nothing..
We always say the reaction of players on the ice to a hit will always give a good indication if that hit was bad. Nothing from the league or club owners would certainly give the impression that nothing untoward has occurred.
But with respect, that isn't the point. I quite accept that no rules are broken but it is very difficult to write about the situation when the league is silent. I am not the only person that they have not responded to and that makes me suspicious given the fact that they have responded quickly in the past. All it takes is a quick note to say that the rules have been tweaked in whatever way and the whole thing becomes a non-story.
If I was Belfast I would be unhappy as well as it casts doubt on them - I am actually surprised they (i.e. Belfast) haven't said something to clear it all up.
If I was Belfast I would be unhappy as well as it casts doubt on them - I am actually surprised they (i.e. Belfast) haven't said something to clear it all up.
Thread starter
#32
Hypothetically speaking.... if I was one of those club owners I would raise the matter privately with the league and try and get action taken.
If I was unsuccessful I could announce it myself, but it would look unprofessional to both the league and myself, especially if my club had been on a bad run recently.
So to try and save myself some embarrassment, I would leak it to a local journalist to let them do it instead.
All hypothetical of course.
If I was unsuccessful I could announce it myself, but it would look unprofessional to both the league and myself, especially if my club had been on a bad run recently.
So to try and save myself some embarrassment, I would leak it to a local journalist to let them do it instead.
All hypothetical of course.
Whilst we’re speaking hypothetically, how ridiculous would it look if the owner of a club vying for the title, wrote a letter to the Chairman of the League demanding clarification on whether rules had been breached?
Hypothetically speaking again, how ridiculous, embarrassing and amateurish that would appear.
Much neater all round if a local journalist were to make representations.
Then all could be ignored or denied due to the ambiguity and opacity of the rules and any potential embarrassing situations are avoided.
Plausible Deniability!
Hypothetically speaking again, how ridiculous, embarrassing and amateurish that would appear.
Much neater all round if a local journalist were to make representations.
Then all could be ignored or denied due to the ambiguity and opacity of the rules and any potential embarrassing situations are avoided.
Plausible Deniability!
If any of that were indeed the case, I wonder how long it would be before the iihf started taking an interest in the way the sport is administered in this country.
Whatever the facts of this particular case, there's far too much that goes on in the elite league that absolutely stinks. It's crying out for independent and professional leadership.
Whatever the facts of this particular case, there's far too much that goes on in the elite league that absolutely stinks. It's crying out for independent and professional leadership.
I think we are in the perfect place to raise these concerns. If Guildford did it would look like sour grapes, if Sheffield do it (to be honest I'd expect them too) they just look like bad sports but us.... even if Belfast played a load of beer league players, they still would have finished above us by the same margin.
Without the proper governance over this league and the independence any credible league should have, we'll never know what's going on. So kudos to Belfast. They know the league, they know the poor leadership of the league, they are essentially operating within the boundaries that the piss poor governance allows. You could argue that it's savvy and something that we could have done but didn't because "there weren't any players out there available". Except of course, for the fella who liked a few vodkas, whilst driving, could barely skate but was happy to stand in front of the net on a powerplay - but other than him, no one else was available.
Without the proper governance over this league and the independence any credible league should have, we'll never know what's going on. So kudos to Belfast. They know the league, they know the poor leadership of the league, they are essentially operating within the boundaries that the piss poor governance allows. You could argue that it's savvy and something that we could have done but didn't because "there weren't any players out there available". Except of course, for the fella who liked a few vodkas, whilst driving, could barely skate but was happy to stand in front of the net on a powerplay - but other than him, no one else was available.
@Finny
What a cop-out...What were you told?
Or are you under the "I'm going to tell you something but you must swear not to tell anyone " rule?
Your post was a general question for a general response. If the league has not responded to you and others, have you emailed a direct question to the Devils Org, GM or Steve King.? We know they read the forum..Steve can't be that tied up, following his son play hockey that he couldn't either (a) respond to your direct question or (b) get Todd to respond.
These are the best owners the club has had, and you relegate them to hiding behind a story in a Sheffield paper..really.You think so little of their integrity
As a champion of transparency, you should publish what you were told, the parts relevant to "this puzzle." why not share your information to help this along?
Share the details, and others will take it up..then you become the driving force for answers, not a rag-tag newspaper.
Not to do so, you come across as a hypocrite. "Do as I say, not as I do."
Or worse..part of the cover-up..knowing information and not passing it on to the forum.
You could always "leek" to the press.
That appears to be your method of choice...hiding behind anonymity ( or hypotheticals )
On a more positive note..good luck this weekend..
I hope your club and fans have a great time over in Belfast..love seeing you over, and you make a shed full of noise. Great atmosphere..
So whatever team you play, The giants 1st,2nd or 3rds, good luck..
What a cop-out...What were you told?
Or are you under the "I'm going to tell you something but you must swear not to tell anyone " rule?
Your post was a general question for a general response. If the league has not responded to you and others, have you emailed a direct question to the Devils Org, GM or Steve King.? We know they read the forum..Steve can't be that tied up, following his son play hockey that he couldn't either (a) respond to your direct question or (b) get Todd to respond.
These are the best owners the club has had, and you relegate them to hiding behind a story in a Sheffield paper..really.You think so little of their integrity
As a champion of transparency, you should publish what you were told, the parts relevant to "this puzzle." why not share your information to help this along?
Share the details, and others will take it up..then you become the driving force for answers, not a rag-tag newspaper.
Not to do so, you come across as a hypocrite. "Do as I say, not as I do."
Or worse..part of the cover-up..knowing information and not passing it on to the forum.
You could always "leek" to the press.
That appears to be your method of choice...hiding behind anonymity ( or hypotheticals )
On a more positive note..good luck this weekend..
I hope your club and fans have a great time over in Belfast..love seeing you over, and you make a shed full of noise. Great atmosphere..
So whatever team you play, The giants 1st,2nd or 3rds, good luck..
Last edited:
"Samael.
Unfortunately we are going to need a lot more than luck this weekend to come away with 1. some respect and 2. league points.
I suspect your fellow Giant, Claret, will be on here tonight gloating after we've been mauled, we'll see'
This Devils team is Jykell and Hyde.. If Jykell appears, Giants are going to have a few sore bodies
Unfortunately we are going to need a lot more than luck this weekend to come away with 1. some respect and 2. league points.
I suspect your fellow Giant, Claret, will be on here tonight gloating after we've been mauled, we'll see'
This Devils team is Jykell and Hyde.. If Jykell appears, Giants are going to have a few sore bodies
Thread starter
#40
I've been thinking about this comment quite a bit over the past couple of days. Should it be up to me to post what I have been told if the league are determined to hush it up?
And I had initially decided not to bother due to the hassle I would probably get from other fans.
But then I ended up getting lots of abuse from Belfast fans on Twitter for just asking the question. So this is the various bits I've heard from different people and which all seems to fit:
Nobody seems certain whether it's 19 import signings + 1 spare for a netminder. Or 20 + 1 spare for netminder. But even if it is 20+1 then even when you take into account Raine's retirement Belfast would be 1 over.
So when Belfast sign McLeod they initially classed him as injury cover for Soy. Which is allowed and they even confirmed it in the announcement. But then Soy returned from injury so they switched it to..... Lewis Hook.
But Lewis Hook is a Brit. And the rules on IRL are in the section referring to signing imports, not home-grown players. But Belfast argued that it doesn't say specifically that you can't sign an import to cover a Brit and so did it anyway.
Which some might claim is not within the spirit of the rules and others might say is breaking the rules.
But nobody knows what injury Lewis Hook has. I can find no mention of him by Belfast since his last game. He was apparently removed from the roster on the Giants website and EIHL website (but is now back on both).
It would appear that Lewis Hook has actually been suspended by Belfast and been sent home to Peterborough pending a hearing for gross misconduct. I don't think it is fair for me to post what that gross misconduct was for as it involves several people and their personal lives -(but if you look in the right places on social media it is there).
But anyone who has been suspended by a team is not eligible to play and so not eligible to be on the Injury Reserve List.
So it would seem to me that the Belfast organisation have exploited a pretty horrible situation for their own benefit.
And I had initially decided not to bother due to the hassle I would probably get from other fans.
But then I ended up getting lots of abuse from Belfast fans on Twitter for just asking the question. So this is the various bits I've heard from different people and which all seems to fit:
Nobody seems certain whether it's 19 import signings + 1 spare for a netminder. Or 20 + 1 spare for netminder. But even if it is 20+1 then even when you take into account Raine's retirement Belfast would be 1 over.
So when Belfast sign McLeod they initially classed him as injury cover for Soy. Which is allowed and they even confirmed it in the announcement. But then Soy returned from injury so they switched it to..... Lewis Hook.
But Lewis Hook is a Brit. And the rules on IRL are in the section referring to signing imports, not home-grown players. But Belfast argued that it doesn't say specifically that you can't sign an import to cover a Brit and so did it anyway.
Which some might claim is not within the spirit of the rules and others might say is breaking the rules.
But nobody knows what injury Lewis Hook has. I can find no mention of him by Belfast since his last game. He was apparently removed from the roster on the Giants website and EIHL website (but is now back on both).
It would appear that Lewis Hook has actually been suspended by Belfast and been sent home to Peterborough pending a hearing for gross misconduct. I don't think it is fair for me to post what that gross misconduct was for as it involves several people and their personal lives -(but if you look in the right places on social media it is there).
But anyone who has been suspended by a team is not eligible to play and so not eligible to be on the Injury Reserve List.
So it would seem to me that the Belfast organisation have exploited a pretty horrible situation for their own benefit.