No doubt in my mind, Accrington have been charged because of their players' conduct towards the officials - particularly the incident with the linesman.
Nothing to do with the Taylor incident. They've dealt with that already.
FA will see that they need to show that they protect officials.
Shame the ref didn’t protect his colleague at the time.
No doubt in my mind, Accrington have been charged because of their players' conduct towards the officials - particularly the incident with the linesman.
Nothing to do with the Taylor incident. They've dealt with that already.
FA will see that they need to show that they protect officials.
Shame the ref didn’t protect his colleague at the time.
Never fear, Solly was there.
Remarkable really as he's only 5'3" - although I've heard he's better than a certain full kit w*nker ex central defender.
No doubt in my mind, Accrington have been charged because of their players' conduct towards the officials - particularly the incident with the linesman.
Nothing to do with the Taylor incident. They've dealt with that already.
FA will see that they need to show that they protect officials.
Shame the ref didn’t protect his colleague at the time.
To be fair to the ref, the match video shows that once he'd given the penalty and pointed to the spot, he ran across the pitch straight to the lino.
The amazing thing is the ref didn't caution any of those Accrington players crowding and abusing the lino.
No doubt in my mind, Accrington have been charged because of their players' conduct towards the officials - particularly the incident with the linesman.
Nothing to do with the Taylor incident. They've dealt with that already.
FA will see that they need to show that they protect officials.
Shame the ref didn’t protect his colleague at the time.
To be fair to the ref, the match video shows that once he'd given the penalty and pointed to the spot, he ran across the pitch straight to the lino.
The amazing thing is the ref didn't caution any of those Accrington players crowding and abusing the lino.
I think ran is probably exaggerating. He jogged over and then didn't really do anything. Solly was already there and was fending off the AS players who were intimidating the lino.
Never seen a team lose it like they did on Saturday, nobody seems to have mentioned their No 3 Hughes, he was at the officials non-stop after the penalty. Although, if he didn't stamp on Taylor, I suppose he'll be up for a fair play award.
No doubt in my mind, Accrington have been charged because of their players' conduct towards the officials - particularly the incident with the linesman.
Nothing to do with the Taylor incident. They've dealt with that already.
FA will see that they need to show that they protect officials.
Shame the ref didn’t protect his colleague at the time.
To be fair to the ref, the match video shows that once he'd given the penalty and pointed to the spot, he ran across the pitch straight to the lino.
The amazing thing is the ref didn't caution any of those Accrington players crowding and abusing the lino.
I think ran is probably exaggerating. He jogged over and then didn't really do anything. Solly was already there and was fending off the AS players who were intimidating the lino.
Well, I don't believe the ref is an Olympic sprinter and the video shows that he himself was being pursued by Accrington players giving him grief.
But I think we agree that it was unbelievable the ref didn't at least then caution a number of Accrington players for dissent and intimidation.
Good. Their attitude towards the poor Lino and the poorer ref was inexcusable. We can bitch and moan about the individual player behaviours during the melee but the total lack of respect for the officials totally deserved this charge.
I cannot believe what their manager has said.... Stanley boss John Coleman said Finley had apologised for his actions but said the midfielder did not stamp on Charlton's Taylor.
"What you see doesn't lie, he has got involved like other players have got involved," said Coleman of the incident.
"He has been foolish. I know Sam and there is not a great deal of malice in him.
"He hasn't actually caught the lad but he has put his foot in there where he could endanger someone.
"He knows it is wrong. He has apologised to the club, we had already dealt with it ourselves internally, and any further action we will have to live with it.
If he really doesn't think it was a stamping then what an utter moron he is. Just keep your mouth shut and say that it will be handled internally.
Any respect I had for Accrington has gone straight out of the window.
It wasn't a stamp. He raked him, which is wholly unacceptable, but not the same.
It was a stamp and a rake but doesn't matter what it was.
My final comment, is that if Taylor was truly stamped on, it's surprising that he showed no sign of any injury.
What's frustrating is that at the moment, the only player with any punishment from the incidents is Taylor.
To be fair, he was the first offender.
He also arguably did the least wrong. Sykes and Finley both did far worse and the #3 should have been sent off for his continued verbal abuse and intimidation of the officials.
I cannot believe what their manager has said.... Stanley boss John Coleman said Finley had apologised for his actions but said the midfielder did not stamp on Charlton's Taylor.
"What you see doesn't lie, he has got involved like other players have got involved," said Coleman of the incident.
"He has been foolish. I know Sam and there is not a great deal of malice in him.
"He hasn't actually caught the lad but he has put his foot in there where he could endanger someone.
"He knows it is wrong. He has apologised to the club, we had already dealt with it ourselves internally, and any further action we will have to live with it.
If he really doesn't think it was a stamping then what an utter moron he is. Just keep your mouth shut and say that it will be handled internally.
Any respect I had for Accrington has gone straight out of the window.
It wasn't a stamp. He raked him, which is wholly unacceptable, but not the same.
It was a stamp and a rake but doesn't matter what it was.
My final comment, is that if Taylor was truly stamped on, it's surprising that he showed no sign of any injury.
He brings his boot down on his head first, its a stamp regardless of how hard it is. The charge is a stamp, end of.
I cannot believe what their manager has said.... Stanley boss John Coleman said Finley had apologised for his actions but said the midfielder did not stamp on Charlton's Taylor.
"What you see doesn't lie, he has got involved like other players have got involved," said Coleman of the incident.
"He has been foolish. I know Sam and there is not a great deal of malice in him.
"He hasn't actually caught the lad but he has put his foot in there where he could endanger someone.
"He knows it is wrong. He has apologised to the club, we had already dealt with it ourselves internally, and any further action we will have to live with it.
If he really doesn't think it was a stamping then what an utter moron he is. Just keep your mouth shut and say that it will be handled internally.
Any respect I had for Accrington has gone straight out of the window.
It wasn't a stamp. He raked him, which is wholly unacceptable, but not the same.
It was a stamp and a rake but doesn't matter what it was.
My final comment, is that if Taylor was truly stamped on, it's surprising that he showed no sign of any injury.
Agreed. He was raked. Very nasty. Stamping would be another level. Sorry @NorthumberlandAddick
I cannot believe what their manager has said.... Stanley boss John Coleman said Finley had apologised for his actions but said the midfielder did not stamp on Charlton's Taylor.
"What you see doesn't lie, he has got involved like other players have got involved," said Coleman of the incident.
"He has been foolish. I know Sam and there is not a great deal of malice in him.
"He hasn't actually caught the lad but he has put his foot in there where he could endanger someone.
"He knows it is wrong. He has apologised to the club, we had already dealt with it ourselves internally, and any further action we will have to live with it.
If he really doesn't think it was a stamping then what an utter moron he is. Just keep your mouth shut and say that it will be handled internally.
Any respect I had for Accrington has gone straight out of the window.
It wasn't a stamp. He raked him, which is wholly unacceptable, but not the same.
It was a stamp and a rake but doesn't matter what it was.
My final comment, is that if Taylor was truly stamped on, it's surprising that he showed no sign of any injury.
He brings his boot down on his head first, its a stamp regardless of how hard it is. The charge is a stamp, end of.
Sorry you are wrong. The charge was violent conduct and he got a 5 game ban.
They got 4 bookings and no sending off’s and are charged by the FA. It is the right decision to charge them but goes to show what a crap job the ref did that they only had 4 bookings.
Their management team’s comments both immediately after by Mr Bell and now by their manager do them no favours and explain why their players have the attitude they do.
Poor form AS. Acted like park footballer, which, given how they played is where many of them are likely to end up anyway!
I cannot believe what their manager has said.... Stanley boss John Coleman said Finley had apologised for his actions but said the midfielder did not stamp on Charlton's Taylor.
"What you see doesn't lie, he has got involved like other players have got involved," said Coleman of the incident.
"He has been foolish. I know Sam and there is not a great deal of malice in him.
"He hasn't actually caught the lad but he has put his foot in there where he could endanger someone.
"He knows it is wrong. He has apologised to the club, we had already dealt with it ourselves internally, and any further action we will have to live with it.
If he really doesn't think it was a stamping then what an utter moron he is. Just keep your mouth shut and say that it will be handled internally.
Any respect I had for Accrington has gone straight out of the window.
The only redeeming thing out of that is that he still pretty much admits his player is a malicious prick.. "I know Sam and there is not a great deal of malice in him"... Just a good deal of malice then?
I cannot believe what their manager has said.... Stanley boss John Coleman said Finley had apologised for his actions but said the midfielder did not stamp on Charlton's Taylor.
"What you see doesn't lie, he has got involved like other players have got involved," said Coleman of the incident.
"He has been foolish. I know Sam and there is not a great deal of malice in him.
"He hasn't actually caught the lad but he has put his foot in there where he could endanger someone.
"He knows it is wrong. He has apologised to the club, we had already dealt with it ourselves internally, and any further action we will have to live with it.
If he really doesn't think it was a stamping then what an utter moron he is. Just keep your mouth shut and say that it will be handled internally.
Any respect I had for Accrington has gone straight out of the window.
The only redeeming thing out of that is that he still pretty much admits his player is a malicious prick.. "I know Sam and there is not a great deal of malice in him"... Just a good deal of malice then?
The only redeeming thing...........Is we got 3 points
I cannot believe what their manager has said.... Stanley boss John Coleman said Finley had apologised for his actions but said the midfielder did not stamp on Charlton's Taylor.
"What you see doesn't lie, he has got involved like other players have got involved," said Coleman of the incident.
"He has been foolish. I know Sam and there is not a great deal of malice in him.
"He hasn't actually caught the lad but he has put his foot in there where he could endanger someone.
"He knows it is wrong. He has apologised to the club, we had already dealt with it ourselves internally, and any further action we will have to live with it.
If he really doesn't think it was a stamping then what an utter moron he is. Just keep your mouth shut and say that it will be handled internally.
Any respect I had for Accrington has gone straight out of the window.
It wasn't a stamp. He raked him, which is wholly unacceptable, but not the same.
It was a stamp and a rake but doesn't matter what it was.
My final comment, is that if Taylor was truly stamped on, it's surprising that he showed no sign of any injury.
He brings his boot down on his head first, its a stamp regardless of how hard it is. The charge is a stamp, end of.
Sorry you are wrong. The charge was violent conduct and he got a 5 game ban.
I cannot believe what their manager has said.... Stanley boss John Coleman said Finley had apologised for his actions but said the midfielder did not stamp on Charlton's Taylor.
"What you see doesn't lie, he has got involved like other players have got involved," said Coleman of the incident.
"He has been foolish. I know Sam and there is not a great deal of malice in him.
"He hasn't actually caught the lad but he has put his foot in there where he could endanger someone.
"He knows it is wrong. He has apologised to the club, we had already dealt with it ourselves internally, and any further action we will have to live with it.
If he really doesn't think it was a stamping then what an utter moron he is. Just keep your mouth shut and say that it will be handled internally.
Any respect I had for Accrington has gone straight out of the window.
It wasn't a stamp. He raked him, which is wholly unacceptable, but not the same.
It was a stamp and a rake but doesn't matter what it was.
My final comment, is that if Taylor was truly stamped on, it's surprising that he showed no sign of any injury.
He brings his boot down on his head first, its a stamp regardless of how hard it is. The charge is a stamp, end of.
Sorry you are wrong. The charge was violent conduct and he got a 5 game ban.
I cannot believe what their manager has said.... Stanley boss John Coleman said Finley had apologised for his actions but said the midfielder did not stamp on Charlton's Taylor.
"What you see doesn't lie, he has got involved like other players have got involved," said Coleman of the incident.
"He has been foolish. I know Sam and there is not a great deal of malice in him.
"He hasn't actually caught the lad but he has put his foot in there where he could endanger someone.
"He knows it is wrong. He has apologised to the club, we had already dealt with it ourselves internally, and any further action we will have to live with it.
If he really doesn't think it was a stamping then what an utter moron he is. Just keep your mouth shut and say that it will be handled internally.
Any respect I had for Accrington has gone straight out of the window.
It wasn't a stamp. He raked him, which is wholly unacceptable, but not the same.
It was a stamp and a rake but doesn't matter what it was.
My final comment, is that if Taylor was truly stamped on, it's surprising that he showed no sign of any injury.
He brings his boot down on his head first, its a stamp regardless of how hard it is. The charge is a stamp, end of.
Sorry you are wrong. The charge was violent conduct and he got a 5 game ban.
I cannot believe what their manager has said.... Stanley boss John Coleman said Finley had apologised for his actions but said the midfielder did not stamp on Charlton's Taylor.
"What you see doesn't lie, he has got involved like other players have got involved," said Coleman of the incident.
"He has been foolish. I know Sam and there is not a great deal of malice in him.
"He hasn't actually caught the lad but he has put his foot in there where he could endanger someone.
"He knows it is wrong. He has apologised to the club, we had already dealt with it ourselves internally, and any further action we will have to live with it.
If he really doesn't think it was a stamping then what an utter moron he is. Just keep your mouth shut and say that it will be handled internally.
Any respect I had for Accrington has gone straight out of the window.
It wasn't a stamp. He raked him, which is wholly unacceptable, but not the same.
It was a stamp and a rake but doesn't matter what it was.
My final comment, is that if Taylor was truly stamped on, it's surprising that he showed no sign of any injury.
He brings his boot down on his head first, its a stamp regardless of how hard it is. The charge is a stamp, end of.
Sorry you are wrong. The charge was violent conduct and he got a 5 game ban.
Racked, stamped, put the boot in ? I think its becoming pedantic to argue over the details. Taylor sounded contrite in his words after his red card was upheld, hence why he apologized to his team mates, manager and the fans. I'm disappointed with Taylor as he's been getting cheap yellow cards all season with dissent. Play on the edge but missing 3 games because of a Beckham back flip and possibly another 2 at the business end of the season isn't clever. Yes I know his play has been excellent.
Accrington could've had 3 players sent off, and quite rightly have been charged. The gang mentality was shocking against Lyle and the assistant Ref.
I cannot believe what their manager has said.... Stanley boss John Coleman said Finley had apologised for his actions but said the midfielder did not stamp on Charlton's Taylor.
"What you see doesn't lie, he has got involved like other players have got involved," said Coleman of the incident.
"He has been foolish. I know Sam and there is not a great deal of malice in him.
"He hasn't actually caught the lad but he has put his foot in there where he could endanger someone.
"He knows it is wrong. He has apologised to the club, we had already dealt with it ourselves internally, and any further action we will have to live with it.
If he really doesn't think it was a stamping then what an utter moron he is. Just keep your mouth shut and say that it will be handled internally.
Any respect I had for Accrington has gone straight out of the window.
It wasn't a stamp. He raked him, which is wholly unacceptable, but not the same.
It was a stamp and a rake but doesn't matter what it was.
My final comment, is that if Taylor was truly stamped on, it's surprising that he showed no sign of any injury.
He brings his boot down on his head first, its a stamp regardless of how hard it is. The charge is a stamp, end of.
You said the charge was a stamp. It was not. You are wrong. I'm not sure why you cannot comprehend a simple fact. You can carry on forever saying it was a stamp or someone else says it was a stamp, it doesn't matter. You say it was a stamp, I say he was raked. We'll agree to disagree. It really doesn't matter. But you can't change facts, however many posts you make. The charge was for violent conduct, not for a stamp, that is my point.
Evidence 1
Accrington Stanley midfielder Sam Finley has been given a five-game suspension for violent conduct by the Football Association after appearing to stamp on Charlton's Lyle Taylor.
Sam Finley has been suspended for five games after he was found to have committed an act of violent conduct for which the standard punishment “would be clearly insufficient”. The midfielder was involved in an incident during the 80th minute of last Saturday’s game against Charlton which was not seen by the match officials but caught on camera.
Finley admitted the charge but contested that the standard penalty was clearly insufficient.
An Independent Regulatory Commission subsequently upheld The FA’s claim that the standard three-match sanction should be increased.
Knock on wood, it doesn't look we as a club are going to be charged with our part in either brawl. Though they haven't either. Just for their conduct against the linesman.
Never seen a team lose it like they did on Saturday, nobody seems to have mentioned their No 3 Hughes, he was at the officials non-stop after the penalty. Although, if he didn't stamp on Taylor, I suppose he'll be up for a fair play award.
Hughes got booked for dissent though didn't he a short time after play had restarted as he kept on at the ref. Therefore the ref has 'dealt with him as such. It's just everyone else!
I cannot believe what their manager has said.... Stanley boss John Coleman said Finley had apologised for his actions but said the midfielder did not stamp on Charlton's Taylor.
"What you see doesn't lie, he has got involved like other players have got involved," said Coleman of the incident.
"He has been foolish. I know Sam and there is not a great deal of malice in him.
"He hasn't actually caught the lad but he has put his foot in there where he could endanger someone.
"He knows it is wrong. He has apologised to the club, we had already dealt with it ourselves internally, and any further action we will have to live with it.
If he really doesn't think it was a stamping then what an utter moron he is. Just keep your mouth shut and say that it will be handled internally.
Any respect I had for Accrington has gone straight out of the window.
It wasn't a stamp. He raked him, which is wholly unacceptable, but not the same.
It was a stamp and a rake but doesn't matter what it was.
My final comment, is that if Taylor was truly stamped on, it's surprising that he showed no sign of any injury.
He brings his boot down on his head first, its a stamp regardless of how hard it is. The charge is a stamp, end of.
You said the charge was a stamp. It was not. You are wrong. I'm not sure why you cannot comprehend a simple fact. You can carry on forever saying it was a stamp or someone else says it was a stamp, it doesn't matter. You say it was a stamp, I say he was raked. We'll agree to disagree. It really doesn't matter. But you can't change facts, however many posts you make. The charge was for violent conduct, not for a stamp, that is my point.
Evidence 1
Accrington Stanley midfielder Sam Finley has been given a five-game suspension for violent conduct by the Football Association after appearing to stamp on Charlton's Lyle Taylor.
Sam Finley has been suspended for five games after he was found to have committed an act of violent conduct for which the standard punishment “would be clearly insufficient”. The midfielder was involved in an incident during the 80th minute of last Saturday’s game against Charlton which was not seen by the match officials but caught on camera.
Finley admitted the charge but contested that the standard penalty was clearly insufficient.
An Independent Regulatory Commission subsequently upheld The FA’s claim that the standard three-match sanction should be increased.
The charge of violent conduct covers many different offences. If you elbow someone in the face it is the same charge. You clearly don't understand. If you bring the sole of your boot down it is a stamp. You can go on for as long as you like on this but that is what happened.
If the Charlton team had behaved like this, CL would have gone into meltdown...
"Evidence of the complete moral decline of Charlton under Douchbag", "What is going on at my beloved club?" etc. etc.
And if anybody had tried to deflect it onto the manager, or the players, there would have been further outrage: "Well, RD employed the manager, so the ultimate responsibility lies with him!", "Yeah, but RD employed the manager, who signed the players, so he much have sanctioned that kind if thuggish attitude!" etc. etc.
But what do we get about the Accrington owner? "Come and meet the best owner in the EFL"?
Comments
The amazing thing is the ref didn't caution any of those Accrington players crowding and abusing the lino.
But I think we agree that it was unbelievable the ref didn't at least then caution a number of Accrington players for dissent and intimidation.
We can bitch and moan about the individual player behaviours during the melee but the total lack of respect for the officials totally deserved this charge.
The charge was violent conduct and he got a 5 game ban.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/46965684
Their management team’s comments both immediately after by Mr Bell and now by their manager do them no favours and explain why their players have the attitude they do.
Poor form AS. Acted like park footballer, which, given how they played is where many of them are likely to end up anyway!
I think its becoming pedantic to argue over the details.
Taylor sounded contrite in his words after his red card was upheld, hence why he apologized to his team mates, manager and the fans.
I'm disappointed with Taylor as he's been getting cheap yellow cards all season with dissent. Play on the edge but missing 3 games because of a Beckham back flip and possibly another 2 at the business end of the season isn't clever.
Yes I know his play has been excellent.
Accrington could've had 3 players sent off, and quite rightly have been charged. The gang mentality was shocking against Lyle and the assistant Ref.
It was not. You are wrong.
I'm not sure why you cannot comprehend a simple fact.
You can carry on forever saying it was a stamp or someone else says it was a stamp, it doesn't matter.
You say it was a stamp, I say he was raked.
We'll agree to disagree. It really doesn't matter.
But you can't change facts, however many posts you make.
The charge was for violent conduct, not for a stamp, that is my point.
Evidence 1
Accrington Stanley midfielder Sam Finley has been given a five-game suspension for violent conduct by the Football Association after appearing to stamp on Charlton's Lyle Taylor.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/46965684
Evidence 2
Sam Finley has been suspended for five games after he was found to have committed an act of violent conduct for which the standard punishment “would be clearly insufficient”.
The midfielder was involved in an incident during the 80th minute of last Saturday’s game against Charlton which was not seen by the match officials but caught on camera.
Finley admitted the charge but contested that the standard penalty was clearly insufficient.
An Independent Regulatory Commission subsequently upheld The FA’s claim that the standard three-match sanction should be increased.
The five game ban begins with immediate effect.
https://accringtonstanley.co.uk/2019/01/finley-to-miss-five-games/
I stand to be corrected!
If the Charlton team had behaved like this, CL would have gone into meltdown...
"Evidence of the complete moral decline of Charlton under Douchbag", "What is going on at my beloved club?" etc. etc.
And if anybody had tried to deflect it onto the manager, or the players, there would have been further outrage: "Well, RD employed the manager, so the ultimate responsibility lies with him!", "Yeah, but RD employed the manager, who signed the players, so he much have sanctioned that kind if thuggish attitude!" etc. etc.
But what do we get about the Accrington owner? "Come and meet the best owner in the EFL"?