Not sure where the "loan" story started but it is totally inaccurate from what I have been told.
The situation as I have had it explained to me is as follows:
- The player in question has had an association with Wynton for some time, thru ethnic football etc. and was part of a Wynrs Academy tour to the UK in 2012 http://www.wynrs.co.nz/wynrsauckland/page120/page4/page5/page7/
- At the start of 2013 he was part of ECB setup for the 2013 MUPC (like most kids and their parents he had no idea of the rules and the implications for turning out for ECB. NB: This year is the first year that I understand the MUPC handbook has been accessible via the AFF website. One questions how enforceable the rules would be in law given there is no contract signed etc. etc.)
- After turning out for ECB the kid then decided he wanted to play for Onehunga Sports in 2013. But the MUPC rules prevented this and the kid then found out he wouldn't be able to play for Onehunga Sports in the 2014 MUPC. Apparently he decided he would then sit out the 2013 winter season to enable the transfer to be completed. But ECB wanted him to play for their 14th & 15th Metro teams so a plan was confirmed, (apparently in consultation with the then CEO of NZF who obviously had strong links to ECB) whereby ECB wrote a letter confirming the kid would be released to play for Onehunga Sports in the 2014 MUPC and winter season. The letter was apparently prepared in April 2013 prior to the winter season commencing and acknowledged by ECB secretary / the then NZF CEO / & Wynton. (Apparently the 2013 version of the MUPC rules referred to players representing the club they played for in the previous winter season hence the declaration was seen as overriding this proviso. In the 2014 version of the rules, released in December 2013 this was changed to who the player was registered with as at the 30th Sept 2013)
- The player duly played the 2013 winter season for ECB and his transfer to Onehunga was apparently completed in Oct 2013 (after the transfer window opened again post the 30th Sept) (ref NZF Reg 5 clause 7.1.6)
- When Onehunga completed their entry the letter accompanied the team list as justification for the player not meeting the 30th Sept criteria. Apparently Akld football questioned this with NZF and the player was cleared to play.
- In the days / weeks leading up to the Auckland qualifiers apparently noises where being made by certain clubs from north of the bridge as to the players eligibility. Whilst Onehunga were advised by AFF / NZF the player was cleared to play it was however pointed out that there was a path of appeal to the NZF Appeals Committee, and that whilst unlikely a successful appeal could ultimately overturn the current eligibility ruling and result in the loss of points for any game the player played in per the MUPC rules.
- Onehunga then played the player in their final qualifying game of the Auckland round when they had already secured 6 points and were assured of a finals weekend berth. Ellerslie then obliged by appealing to gain the certainty desired by all parties. The matter was referred to the NZF Appeal Committee who apparently produced 5 pages of commentary but ultimately thru the appeal out and kicked for touch on the basis NZF had not ruled on the matter and as such the matter should not have been referred to them (go figure!)
- So the tournament progressed a further 2 weekends to the Northern Region qualifiers where Onehunga then were able to include the player on the team card and he took the field again in game 8 (a dead rubber again they had secured sufficient points to qualify for the NZ finals.) Waitakere then appealed his involvement in this game and the Appeal Committee Ruled in their favour on the Thursday evening before the finals weekend and the player was removed from the Onehunga team list. I haven't heard if anyone has formally seen the basis for the Appeals Committee decision although I understand it hadn't been issued at the time of the final's weekend?
So the rest is history Waitakere won the final and are now Australia bound in May, Good Luck to them!
Onehunga chose not to appeal or drag the competition through the muck further. However as I understand it some question marks exist over the validity of players used in the 2013 Northern region finals and the 2014 National Finals. Having dug deeper I understand in 2013 & 2014 players from WaiBop federation clubs transferred to an Auckland Region club for the MUPC on the basis of a shift of over 50km for schooling etc. (Ref NZF regulation 5 rule 7.1.8) which was apparently sighted as the basis on which this is permitted.
Having reviewed this it would appear this interpretation is flawed and fails to apply all relevant
clauses as it is intended:
1. The MUPC rules establish their own definitive position on player
eligibility and make no reference to NZF regulation 5 etc. unlike other parts
of the MUPC rules eg disciplinary matters that refer to NZF regulation 7. From
re reading the MUPC rules the clear intent of these rules are that players
represent the clubs they played for in the previous winter season (i.e. whom
they were registered with as at the 30th Sept)
2. Even if you accept there is a basis to consider NZF Reg 5. Reg 5 clause 7.1.8 specifically refers to the dates of 1st July to 30th Sept (the closed transfer period) which are setout in an earlier clause 7.1.6. As such, surely it is not valid to apply this rule outside of these dates and in a situation where the transfer is completed in Feb only days before the competition starts (NB Feb is obviously the open transfer period, but player eligibility fails on the basis of not meeting the 30th Sept criteria)
Surely per the MUPC rules the players should be playing for their WaiBop clubs in the MUPC (the club for whom they were registered with as at the 30th Sept / played the previous winter season? Or simply missing out as 100’s of kids who play for clubs who don’t enter have too?)
Having read all the reg’s it would seem that having played in the MUPC for the club who they were registered with as at the 30th Sept the correct approach is that they should then seek to have NZF Reg 5, clause 7.1.9 applied (exceptional circumstances) to enable them to shift to a local club post the MUPC for the winter season, when per the MUPC rules they would ordinarily be prevented from transferring!
Aren’t we all lucky no one has decided to pursue this matter! Maybe Mr T and others who have been so vocal re cheating etc. would like to see this matter pursued, and the club(s) involved banned? And I wouldn’t mind betting we don’t see any players being permitted on the basis of this interpretation in 2015