Tylor ban appealed!!

wildthing74

Well-Known Member
#23
ASHIPP said:
wildthing74 said:
The obvious question was why didn't Sawyer and Campbell get 5 games and it was because they had it called as a sucker punch on the night and got thrown out so a 2 game suspension followed.So in essence beacuse Smith called it different on the night both Tylor and the club have to accept the ban is 5 games and tough luck.
Now I really am confused. :?
What is the point of an appeal system or a committee review if they stand by a decision that seems to completely contradict the 3 game ban 'as per the rules' (which seem to change weekly) stated in the league website about Cruickshank ban. It literally seems to be one rule for one player, one rule for another. :twisted: What a complete joke.
Totally agree.I also spoke to Tylor himself on Friday and he was really peeved(thats the best word to use).He said that he was told the ban was because he punched with his glove on so basically they just keep giving different reasons.
He said he has taken many punches this year from guys with gloves on himself but just got on with it and by that rule then Brad should get banned as he punched Bruce in the face with his glove on and got given a 2m minor for roughing.
Tylor said the league is a joke(will that get him an extra 5 games?)and I think we all totally agree with him.
 

DevilDom

Well-Known Member
#24
I don't understand where the figure of £2,000 to appeal has now come from. I'm sure previously this has been quoted as £250.

I'm with James - this is a blatant stich up. We''l give one of your players a ban in excess of bans we have given other players for the same offence but you can appeal if you like - However it will cost you £2k and you have no chance of winning it!

Definitely seems this a shot across the bows from the Elite League to Ragan after he has rattled a few cages up there in their Ivory tower.
 
#25
DevilDom said:
I don't understand where the figure of £2,000 to appeal has now come from.
The amount the league owes the referees at a guess? :shock: :lol:

Andy French is clearly a complete joke, but for some reason is allowed to get on with it.

Any other head of an organisation that had failed to get a sponsor on board for the past 3 years would have been shown the door by now, but not in the EIHL - WHOOOPPPEEE! :lol:
 
#26
DevilDom said:
I don't understand where the figure of £2,000 to appeal has now come from. I'm sure previously this has been quoted as £250.

I'm with James - this is a blatant stich up. We''l give one of your players a ban in excess of bans we have given other players for the same offence but you can appeal if you like - However it will cost you £2k and you have no chance of winning it!

Definitely seems this a shot across the bows from the Elite League to Ragan after he has rattled a few cages up there in their Ivory tower.
dom im fairly sure its always cost £2000 to appeal, if you win you get it back type of thing. can remember it being stated when voth got band at the start of last season
 
#27
DevilDom said:
I don't understand where the figure of £2,000 to appeal has now come from. I'm sure previously this has been quoted as £250.
And I thought I had seen £500 being quoted somewhere!

The league is a joke and it's the people at the top ruining top flight UK hockey.

Either employ smart business men, Mr french, who know how to handle accounts and actually know how to handle a business and make it sustainable, or move on and let other people rescue top flight hockey! :evil:
 
#31
The Muppets think we will forget before the play off finals, big mistake. Looking forward to Convery/French out protests at Nottingham arena this year. Isn t live sports coverage great for this type of thing wooohhooooo. These two muppets are nearly incompetent enough to get the Execs jobs at Cardiff City Council
 
#32
The question I would ask "Is the EIHL trading insolvent" Is it is a registered company

A dormant company incorpoated in 2003 called Elite Ice Hockey League Ltd was dissolved on 2 Vov 2010.

Fot those of you who read my pre-game messages over the weekend my journalist contact has been in touch again and said that there is now more interest in his story.

Time will tell

OJ
 

Gazza272

Well-Known Member
#33
Nott Simpson said:
The question I would ask "Is the EIHL trading insolvent" Is it is a registered company

A dormant company incorpoated in 2003 called Elite Ice Hockey League Ltd was dissolved on 2 Vov 2010.

Fot those of you who read my pre-game messages over the weekend my journalist contact has been in touch again and said that there is now more interest in his story.

Time will tell

OJ

I'ed be careful using EIHL trademarks from 2003. At this time a lot of other hockey clubs from the BNL were registering companies so that the EIHL couldnt have their name. It was one of many petty squabbles at the time.

That era is littered with mess and I would suggest your journalist friend do a thorough examination of names of these companies etc. Which if he is a good journo im sure he will :D
 

Koop11

Well-Known Member
#37
I've hit a point where I'd gladly welcome a revolution that ended the Elite League as we know it. What a complete fix. Other worse 'sucker punches', for example Lepene on Pirpich, are not given any suspensions. Sawyer gets two games for his. Cruikshank after Tylor's punch gets 3 games yet Tylor gets 5 games, 3 of which just happen to be against Belfast and a double header against Sheffield.

Once again, it’s one rule for one, one for another. The Devils are well and truly tucked up once again.
 
#39
ASHIPP said:
wildthing74 said:
What is the point of an appeal system or a committee review if they stand by a decision that seems to completely contradict the 3 game ban 'as per the rules' (which seem to change weekly) stated in the league website about Cruickshank ban. It literally seems to be one rule for one player, one rule for another. :twisted: What a complete joke.
I was almost pulling my hair out when read about Cruickshank and his 3 match suspension for a 'sucker punch' (excessive roughness). The penalty rulings in this league are just silly. As you said one rule for one and one rule for another! AAAAAAAAAAAAAGHHHHH! it really annoys me!
 
Top