An Independent Regulatory Commission has found an aggravated breach of FA Rule E3 against Nicolas Anelka proven and has issued a five-match suspension and a fine of £80,000, pending appeal. The West Bromwich Albion player has also been ordered to complete a compulsory education course. The Independent Regulatory Commission will provide written reasons for its decision in due course. Mr Anelka has the right to appeal the decision. Mr Anelka must notify The FA of his intention to appeal within seven days of receipt of the written reasons. The penalty is suspended until after the outcome of any appeal, or the time for appealing expires, or Mr Anelka notifies The FA of his decision not to appeal. http://www.thefa.com/news/governanc...rom-five-match-suspension#ubpQUMMphliVzshu.99
So, if Suarez makes an essentially racist remark, it's 10 games, but if someone else does something possibly worse, it's 5 games? It's a weak decision imo. You have to show consistency.
'Negrito' versus 'Naughty hands' Gosh how petty, over-regulated, bitchy, silly and serious football has become.
Vydra might be another. A Leeds fan is certain they are signing Vydra on loan, he already got the Wickham loan right.
Vydra hasn't bridged the gap between the Championship and the EPL, so TWS is probably not a bad move for him.
I think racially abusing an opposing player during a game is worse than some obscure gesture that some people find offensive. Not justifying either obviously but I think on the balance of things the bans are fair.
Obviously their both not acceptable, I'm not saying being racist is worse than anti-Semitic, but the bans reflect the context of the offense. Verbally abusing a player on the pitch is worse than an gesture which wasn't directed at anyone but happens to offend some people.
