Strangely, having scanned throught the Couriers online match previews of the Swinton match, there's no mention whatsoever of Ostick having been given 'special dispensation' to play in that game, which would/should have been the case. I reckon this is just a bizarre oversight from someone at the Halifax club, not a case of cheating as might be the accusation levelled at your club. Regardless, shouldn't the player himself have said something? I'm sure most players would be aware of the 'cup-tied' rule??

Recently added

Operational Rule 49:B

[iAny player who has played in a previous round of the challenge cup cannot then play for another team. In the instance of this happening the club in question will pay a £100'000 fine and docked 2 points.[/i

After all that publicity with Hull, all the clubs would have been alert to it.

The RFL surely would have been checking team sheets for this aswell after the embarrasment it caused them... Surely if they can have try line touch judges, they would have got the match officials to check team sheets?

I have tried finding another listing of the Rochdale team for that game - other than Sky's i cant find one - Maybe he didnt play?

That's my feelings actually but this is RL AND Halifax RLFC!

Points? In the Challenge Cup?

League points Sherlock.

We would still finish about you with the deduction!

They are Operational [uChallenge Cup [/urules



If you're going to troll, do it with credibility

My thoughts exactly.

Recently added by VM I suspect.

You do realise this is VM - him and credibility? They just dont go together - its like Fax and Rules.

Ahem

[url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oHg5SJYRHA0&feature=relatedLatest Operational Rules[/url

What the hell?

PENALTY FOR FIELDING INELIGIBLE PLAYER
B4.15 In addition to any other action or penalty which may arise under Section D1 Misconduct, the
Board shall disqualify any competing Club which it determines to have fielded an ineligible
Player, save where the Club can show that it had no fault or negligence, in that the Club did
not know or suspect, and could not reasonably have known or suspected, even with the
exercise of utmost caution, that the Player was ineligible. For the avoidance of doubt where a
Club is disqualified from the competition under this Rule B4:15 its most recent opponent
(irrespective of the result of that match) and only its most recent opponent will be readmitted
to the competition even where the offence was committed in an earlier round.

B4:8 In respect of any Club playing in any Round of the Cup up to and including Round 5, [uonly
players who are correctly registered and eligible to play for that Club under the Rules of the
Competition in which that Club usually competes[/u are eligible to play for that Club in a Cup
Tie.

This rule makes for interesting reading. I believe this one rule may overide the B4:10 rule until the Quarter Finals. When a new rule takes precedent.

Then rule B4:9 Takes Precence in Quarter Finals

B4:9 Only Players on the Register of that Club, or subject to Rule D4:10, Dual Registered with that
Club at the close of RFL business on the Monday immediately prior to the Quarter Finals of
the Cup shall be eligible to play in any Quarter Final, Semi Final or Final Tie.
However nothing in this Operational Rule shall prohibit:
(i) a Player who is on a Club's Academy register; or
(ii) a Player who has been on loan to a Club having his loan extended or returning to his
registered Club;
playing for that Club in all or any such Matches provided that the relevant paperwork is
submitted to the RFL in the format as required from time to time and provided that by playing
the player would not be in breach of B4:10.

B4:10 A player who plays for one Member Club in the Cup cannot, in that same Season, play for
another Club in the Cup. In this respect a Dual Registered player may play for either his Super
League Club or his Championship Club but having played for one may not then play for the
other.

I believe everything is fine, as rule B4:8 makes no mention of B4:10. Therefore under Championship rules Ostick is able to play, however not eligible from the quarters onwards. That's my reading of it.

My brain has just exploded

Whatever that means - i agre with Billyfax!

No mention of Ostick playing here www.rochdaleobserver.co.uk/sport ... ezignan_32 But doesn't mean he didn't

No mention of Ostick playing here www.rochdaleobserver.co.uk/sport ... ezignan_32 But doesn't mean he didn't

Game is off. New sticky thread started.

Quote ="rob_a"No mention of Ostick playing here www.rochdaleobserver.co.uk/sport ... ezignan_32 But doesn't mean he didn't'" [urlhttp://www.skysports.com/rugbyleague/match_facts/0,19935,11070_3253890,00.html[/url

Quote ="rob_a"No mention of Ostick playing here www.rochdaleobserver.co.uk/sport ... ezignan_32 But doesn't mean he didn't'" [urlhttp://www.skysports.com/rugbyleague/match_facts/0,19935,11070_3253890,00.html[/url

That's just saved you a wasted journey, littlerich.

Game off at such short notice too, not good news and someone has a lot of explaining to do at Fax.

I agree.

It has. I'd just had a shave and was ready to set off



The buck stops with Martin Hall. He is the Football Director.