pettiness hmm why would the ffv be petty against smfc who are one of the biggest clubs in the vpl? and the ffa are showing no intrest probably due to the fact they think that the ffv have it under control ?

They are probably trying to clean it up from what i've read theres been multiple clubs fined or docked points this season. Ben is too biased to comment accurately, south melourne could kill little babies and he would find a way to support them.

Why I have argued that appealing the original decision was wrong then?

You tell me though - in a non-biased way -

1) if you were taken to court and convicted of a crime, but believed that the charges weren't proven - would you appeal?

2) if you won that appeal would you consider yourself to have been proven correct in your decision to appeal?

3) having won the appeal, would you be surprised, disappointed or outraged, if new charges were raised based on the same events, and you were convicted again?

4) would you appeal the second decision?

oh well hopefully they sort it all out without dragging through the courts.

16.7 The Appeal Committee has the power to:

(a) dismiss, allow in whole or part, or vary (whether by way of reduction or increase) any Determination of a Judicial Body;
(b) substitute its own sanctions or finding; or
(c) impose any sanction or make any finding that the Judicial Body could have imposed or made.

Well, the appeals committee found that the club was not guilty of the original charges... Then the appeals committee imposed it's own sanctions. It seems that the two are mutually exclusive. You can't punish someone for something you've found them NOT guilty of. Surely?

Well, the appeals committee found that the club was not guilty of the original charges... Then the appeals committee imposed it's own sanctions. It seems that the two are mutually exclusive. You can't punish someone for something you've found them NOT guilty of. Surely?

3
CAS has jurisdiction to hear appeals from the FFA Appeal Committee only if the appeal
does not relate to or arise from a violation of the Laws of the Game, FFA’s grievance
procedure is first fully exhausted and the sanction to be appealed from is one of the
following:

a) a fine greater than $10,000;
b) a match suspension greater than 12 months;
c) exclusion or expulsion from a Competition;
d) suspension or cancellation of licence or accreditation, including Licensed Player
Agent’s licence or coaching accreditation; or
e) ban on taking part in all football related activity.

4
The sole grounds for any appeal to CAS against a decision of the FFA Appeals
Committee are:

a) a party was not afforded a reasonable opportunity to be heard on the issues or merit
and/or sanction;
b) the determination was affected by bias; or
c) the FFA Appeal Committee wrongly accepted or declined jurisdiction.

2
Each Member submits exclusively to the jurisdiction of the Grievance Resolution
Regulations and agrees that it will not attempt to resolve any Grievance in any court of law or
tribunal.

The sole grounds for any appeal to CAS against a decision of the FFA Appeals
Committee are:

a) a party was not afforded a reasonable opportunity to be heard on the issues or merit
and/or sanction;
b) the determination was affected by bias; or
c) the FFA Appeal Committee wrongly accepted or declined jurisdiction.

Here's how I see it, based on the above statement...

a) after being found innocent of the original charges, new charges were imposed and the club was given about 2 minutes to prepare it's response. No further opportunity was given for appeal.
b) the fact that the additional charge was only raised after the initial charges were dismissed, and the seriousness of the revised penalty, indicates that a degree of "how dare you appeal!" was involved. That's a clear bias against the defendant.

Another thing I don't understand - if the charge was so serious that it warranted a 6 point deduction - why the hell wasn't it raised at the original hearing?

ben what cha expect the ffa are a bunch of corrupt mofo's .. all they care about is themselves they fcuked the league up . the sooner they're gone the better.

I dont have a clue what happened but i believe the clubs should work within the system, i assume they knew the options for appeal before the season started and they should work within that. Taking it to court takes it outside that and is just embarrassing for the game.

I would expect FFV's Statutes etc to say the same sort of thing.

The thing that concerns me is that all the FFA, AFC and FIFA documents that deal with this stuff preclude any body from taking action in the courts and I recall a case in the recent past in South America where FIFA threatened the expulsion of the country from FIFA because action was being taken in the civil courts instead of through the systems that FIFA has insisted be in all Member Federations Statutes and Regulations.

Appeals Board Decisions
13.9 The Appeals Board is not obliged to provide reasons for its findings but those findings will be notified to the parties by FFV. If the Appeals Board provides reasons then the Appeals Board may authorise FFV to publish those reasons on the FFV website.
13.10 (a) Where a party has exhausted all avenues of appeal within FFV, that party may appeal that decision via Football Federation Australia‟s National Disciplinary Regulations and Grievance Resolution Regulations.
(b) Subject to clause 13.10(a) a decision of the Appeals Board shall be final and binding on the parties and no party may take any action in any court or tribunal or other forum to challenge such decision or seek to have it varied in any way.

8.2 Disputes
(a) This rule 8.2 applies to a Dispute.
(b) The parties to a Dispute must meet and discuss the matter in dispute,
and, if possible, resolve the Dispute within 14 days after the Dispute
comes to the attention of all of the parties.
(c) If the parties are unable to resolve the Dispute at the meeting or
meetings held in accordance with rule 8.2(b), or if a party fails to
attend such a meeting, then the parties must, within 10 days, hold a
meeting in the presence of a mediator.
(d) The mediator must be:
(i) a person chosen by agreement between the parties; or
(ii) in the absence of agreement:
(A) in the case of a Dispute between a Member
and another Member, a person appointed by
the Directors; or
(B) in the case of a Dispute between a Member
and the Association, a person appointed by
FFA.
(e) A Member can be a mediator.
(f) A Member who is a party to the Dispute cannot be a mediator.
(g) The parties to a Dispute must , in good faith, attempt to settle the
Dispute by mediation.
(h) The mediator, in conducting the mediation, must:
(i) give the parties to the mediation process reasonable
opportunity to be heard; and
(ii) allow due consideration by all parties of any written
statement submitted by any party; and
(iii) ensure that natural justice is accorded to the parties to the
Dispute throughout the mediation process.
(i) The mediator must not determine the Dispute.
(j) If the mediation process does not result in the Dispute being resolved,
the parties may then seek to resolve the Dispute in accordance with
the process set out in the Grievance Procedure.
8.3 Grievances
(a) Subject to rule 8.2:
(i) all Grievances must be determined pursuant to and in
accordance with the process set out in the Grievance
Procedure.
(ii) the Association, Members, Directors, Secretaries and Public
Officers must comply with the Grievance Procedure and must
refer all Grievances to the dispute resolution body established
in accordance with the Grievance Procedure and must not
commence any suit or proceeding in any court or tribunal
until the Grievance Procedure has been exhausted.(iii) this rule 8.3 binds Members, Directors, Secretaries and Public
Officers after they cease to be a Member, a Director or a
Registered Participant if the dispute relates to a matter arising
while they were a Member, a Director, a Secretary or a Public
Officer.
(b) The Association must ensure that Registered Participants and Clubs
comply with this rule 8.3.

They are probably trying to clean it up from what i've read theres been multiple clubs fined or docked points this season. Ben is too biased to comment accurately, south melourne could kill little babies and he would find a way to support them.

God will someone close these clubs down or re-image themselves.the whole work.