I was literally just about to post the exact same thing. How on Earth that wasn't deemed 'frivolous' is beyond me. It's inconsistency like this that makes my blood boil.
More ludicrous is the rejection of the Derry appeal. He had his arms outstretched, Young brushed his hand and went down like a sack of spuds. Never a foul let alone denying a goalscoring opportunity. The incident is a smokescreen for the other issue of the official's mistake for not flagging for offside.
More ludicrous is the rejection of the Derry appeal. He had his arms outstretched, Young brushed his hand and went down like a sack of spuds. Never a foul let alone denying a goalscoring opportunity. The incident is a smokescreen for the other issue of the official's mistake for not flagging for offside.
Completely agree. Mistake on the pitch by the ref, ok that's forgivable.
But how on earth has that appeal not been upheld? And why has there not been a bigger deal made out of it?
I was sad enough to look up the exact wording in the FA Handbook on this....
From Field Offences & Fast Track Section A 5. Claims of Wrongful Dismissal (h) III. If the Commission’s decision is to reject the claim, it will, in every case, go on to consider whether or not the player’s punishment should be increased. If the Commission considers that the rejected claim had no prospect of success and / or amounts to an abuse of process, the Commission shall have the discretion to increase the penalty up to twice the standard punishment set out in this Memorandum.
Frivolous is mentioned in the Standard Rules of the Association but not in the specific rule for wrongful dismissal.
Interesting to see that the punishment can be quite high and not just 1 game and in League 1 it costs £500 to instigate the appeal.
There's an immediate source of inequality £500 to Chelsea is nothing, to us it might be quite substantial, to a struggling club it could make all appeals out of the question. I understand the need for a fee, but shouldn't it be proportionate to turnover?
also the fact that it was an appeal on a ban handed out on video evidence rather than one based on a live decision made by the ref surely means it's frivolous to begin with????
also the fact that it was an appeal on a ban handed out on video evidence rather than one based on a live decision made by the ref surely means it's frivolous to begin with????
This is the bit I don't get either. The ban was given RETROSPECTIVELY so it's not a question of referee error but was judged by the FA panel. It was deemed violent conduct, which it clearly was, so received the standard 3 game ban. As you say Dave, ANY appeal from that point on would surely fit in the `frivolous' catagory cos the panel had already done their judging and sentence had been passed. The panel would simply NEVER turn over their own ruling and would surely see any challenge to this as taking the pi$$.
When you put this alongside the Derry incident this last week you really wonder wtf is going on cos something definately is and its getting ridiculous now.
Of course there was the infamous Shearer sending off which was overturned as soon as the Monday morning as "the video evidence was inconclusive" If they couldn't see the incident properly they should have stood by the ref's decision. And apparently Charlton's pitchside footage had him bang to rights but the FA didn't ask for it. This mob should be sacked forthwith, they make a mockery of the game.
There's an immediate source of inequality £500 to Chelsea is nothing, to us it might be quite substantial, to a struggling club it could make all appeals out of the question. I understand the need for a fee, but shouldn't it be proportionate to turnover?
I thought the £500 was returned if the appeal was upheld. Isn't it a pre-event fine for a failed appeal? Makes lower-level clubs think seriously about making an appeal that is unlikely to be passed. The extra ban was bought in to prevent frivolous appeals where £500 is pocket change for the club.
oh come on now.. you know it wasn't Shearer's fault. It was fortunes fault for having the audacity of having his in Sheares's elbow's way. Accidental of course :-) Which was why it was dismissed by 9.05 Monday morning
Comments
if that is not frivolous then what is !
But how on earth has that appeal not been upheld? And why has there not been a bigger deal made out of it?
From Field Offences & Fast Track
Section A
5. Claims of Wrongful Dismissal
(h) III. If the Commission’s decision is to reject the claim, it will, in every case, go on to consider whether or not the player’s punishment should be increased.
If the Commission considers that the rejected claim had no prospect of success and / or amounts to an abuse of process, the Commission shall have the discretion to increase the penalty up to twice the standard punishment set out in this Memorandum.
Frivolous is mentioned in the Standard Rules of the Association but not in the specific rule for wrongful dismissal.
Interesting to see that the punishment can be quite high and not just 1 game and in League 1 it costs £500 to instigate the appeal.
As you say Dave, ANY appeal from that point on would surely fit in the `frivolous' catagory cos the panel had already done their judging and sentence had been passed. The panel would simply NEVER turn over their own ruling and would surely see any challenge to this as taking the pi$$.
When you put this alongside the Derry incident this last week you really wonder wtf is going on cos something definately is and its getting ridiculous now.
Premier League is £1,500
Championship is £750
League 2 is £350
Fee is returned if the appeal is successful.