.jpg)
What can and can't you get away with as a football club anymore?
This season, West Ham were found guilty of breaking numerous player rules with the Premiership - and fined less than ten percent of next season's Premiership TV income. In the lower reaches Bury were kicked out of the FA Cup, with 15% plus in lost revenue for the season just on the lost gate receipts, for only getting 'verbal' permission for playing a loan player in the FA Cup that had already played several times in the League.
AFC Wimbledon received a massive points deduction, later largely rescinded - thanks to an expensive legal team, for fielding a 'Welsh' player. Only Last season, Altrincham received an eighteen point deduction for player offences while Accrington received a minimal fine. Stanley, again, received only a 'minimal' fine for repeat offences this season.
So, what is - and isn't - acceptable?
Chesterfield, League Two newboys next season, faced 90 seperate charges in 2001 over a false reporting of gates and transfer irregularities. They faced a deduction of most of their points earned after admitting irregularities over the signing of then-top scorer Luke Beckett, but ended up with a sufficiently mininal deduction to secure promotion regardless.
Swindon were demoted in 1991 for making illegal payments to players - two divisions to be precise. Boston got just a minor points deduction for the same reasons after the Football League ducked the issue and claimed the offences were out of their jurisdiction - even if they managed to deduct points.
It seems like a cartel - if you're face fits, you're exempt from the rules. The upstarts of Swindon, a team from the regions never allowed to be a top flight club, get whipped. Altrincham, the little - part time - engine that could, get whipped.
West Ham - the club of the FA's Director Of Football, Trevor Brooking, get a 'minimal' fine that sees a posse of Premiership clubs threatening legal action.
So, where's the precedent? Where can sides draw the line when they 'fracture' the laws of the game?
Looking at recent history, the law is on the side of those that can afford it. AFC Wimbledon's recinded points deduction - thanks to a heavyweight legal team - paved the way for Accrington to escape their second infringement of the rules in 12 months. Swindon's "historical" demotion was done in the day that the FA were never, ever, questioned. Football wasn't so important, financially, to warrant a lengthy legal battle but, now it is, the FA and Football League appear so more ready to "roll over" than face a costly legal battle.
Justice is for those that can afford it or, at least, those that follow those that can afford it.
