12 clubs fined for chaka khan cup teams

[wing commander]

  Now I'm certainly not a fan on this format that's for sure, but at least they have fined the clubs who broke the rules..I see Luton are furious with their 15k fine,but that's the price you pay for gaining an advantage...They argue they won the games so it's not justified but while there first team players were sat with their feet up ours were running around and these games add up.....They really couldn't have made a bigger arse of this competition if they tried....

[swintonrover]

Say Luton refuse to pay the fine. Then what? "Ooh we'll kick you out of a competition that you don't want to be in..."

[wing commander]

     Interestingly the teams who subbed players after two minutes have also been fined for complying with the spirit of the game....Luton have earned 15k from there prize money so far so technically they haven't lost much...The fact that for some teams the fines don't mean that much while other cash strapped teams cant afford it still leaves a unfair advantage...
    Personally when they hopefully sit down and rejig the format I'm in favour of a points deduction instead,that would mean everybody will abide by the same set of rules which is a must for any competition....

[bobjimwilly]

Why was the rule put in that (effectively) forced EFL clubs to play X amount of regular first-team players? To keep attendances up? 

[DonnyNoel]

Why was the rule put in that (effectively) forced EFL clubs to play X amount of regular first-team players? To keep attendances up? 

When he was the Darlo manager Dave Penney said it was a sponsors condition (suppose it would have been the JPT back then?) as he said you can't have sponsors dictating team selection. Not sure if that was actually the case or not and still is now.

[drfchound]

     Interestingly the teams who subbed players after two minutes have also been fined for complying with the spirit of the game....Luton have earned 15k from there prize money so far so technically they haven't lost much...The fact that for some teams the fines don't mean that much while other cash strapped teams cant afford it still leaves a unfair advantage...
    Personally when they hopefully sit down and rejig the format I'm in favour of a points deduction instead,that would mean everybody will abide by the same set of rules which is a must for any competition....

The article i read said that Luton had picked up £20,000 in prize money.

[RedRover45]

Don't know the results of their 3 games but there was an article in the Mansfield programme that said the winners of a group game got 10k and each team got 5k for a drawn game regardless of penalties.

[Pancho Regan]

Don't know the results of their 3 games but there was an article in the Mansfield programme that said the winners of a group game got 10k and each team got 5k for a drawn game regardless of penalties.

If that's true it's not bad prize money and certainly more than I expected.

[Lincoln Rover]

I understood it was £10 k  for winning a game and £5 k for drawing after 90 mins.
Based on that we made £20 k on winnings, yet AT BEST LOST £1 k on the two home matches.
This is made up by losing match fees, officials,stewards etc and then dividing the takings ( 45% each ) and 10 % into the pool.
That's how I understand it.
I've checked the prize money site and amended my original figures.

[ravenrover]

Why don't the prem/champ clubs get fined for playing too many over age potential 1st team players, ie Derby, Stoke to mention just a couple?

[ravenrover]

Why don't the prem/champ clubs get fined for playing too many over age potential 1st team players, ie Derby, Stoke to mention just a couple?

It's alright fining teams in League One and League Two, who have been perceived to have fielded weaker teams, but what about teams such as Derby County, Norwich City, etc, who have included several senior professionals in their line-ups - even though it's a competition for Under 23s?

If we're going to have Under 23s teams involved, it should be just that. Not an Under 23s team and your 35-year-old reserve team 'keeper, your two centre-backs with 350 league appearances each, or your ageing striker who can't get a game for the first team?

All that's happened with this competition is that, as it's progressed, it's lost even more credibility on a weekly basis.

What next? If the final is Wolves' Under 31s against Norwich's Under 28s, playing it at Peterborough United, because it's halfway between the two - but announcing it a week before the game.

It just makes the competition look unprofessional and sloppy - and you can't build a positive reputation, build up consumer confidence in this competition, when things are constantly happening to make it look sloppy.

Just a couple of hours too late Rigo, or is it plagiarism   

[The Red Baron]

It's actually under 21 teams, although that has produced further confusion because Development sides are under-23 from this season.

It would make sense to have under 23 sides in the competition but not allow any over-age players. At the moment they have to include six under 21 players but the rest can be as old as Methuselah!

The whole thing strikes me as something that was drawn up on the back of a fag packet an hour before it was launched.

[wilts rover]

The whole thing strikes me as something that was drawn up on the back of a fag packet an hour before it was launched.

Aye that will be Shaun Harvey then...

With regard to the fines, I am suprised that no-one has pointed out that several of the clubs who were fined were ones who voted for the changes.