I hope he gets let off as I'm at the final on Sunday and want to see all the best players and presumably you're playing a relegation rival at some point in the three games. However, for ever precedent that could be cited that didn't get a red card there is one that was just as bad which did.
They are appealing excessive ban, so he won't get off for Sunday. At best the ban will be reduced. We are playing West Ham and Saints. Burnley are playing Swansea, he'll probably score
Fair enough. Good luck to him but I'd have thought "violent" conduct is either three games or nothing. Didn't think there could be an in between.
Never going to be overturned. FA showed what they think of the whole thing when they didn't punish Barnes. They've got Atkinson's back and that's that.
Vertonghen did the same thing against West Ham and got away scot free. Nothing will come of our appeal though. The FA are twats.
The whole thing's a mess. If an incident is judged serious enough to be given a minimum of a 3 game ban then it should be serious enough that they don't even consider letting a player off(like with Barnes) due to a technicality; which seems to always be that the referee saw at least some of the incident at the time. You can't re-ref decisions? Bollocks, there wouldn't be a right of appeal with an independent panel to review it if that was the case, so why doesn't it work the other way too? The law should be changed. Acts of aggression like Matic's should be open to a ban where appropriate but to give them an automatic 3 game ban that puts them in the same bracket as reckless, out of control tackles and serious violent conduct is just plain wrong. However without that change I don't see how Chelsea can have a case for appeal, I can't remember a single case where this has happened. I think Chelsea are just playing this clever, an out and out appeal wouldn't stand a chance and would seriously risk an extra game ban for a frivolous appeal. By only appealing the length of the ban, they've covered themselves a bit and I wouldn't be surprised if the panel will still only be allowed to consider the same 2 options, rescinding the red card and ban or letting it stand.
Spot on, until the 'don't see how Chelsea have a case...' comment. It's funny that Matic's more than justified push, gets put in the same bracket as this
atleast the headbutt would have been cushioned by his 'fro! Agreed though, an unprovoked headbutt and a provoked firm shove should not be under the same bracket, unfortunately, with this piece of **** governing body and their bizarre rules, they are.......mind boggling/
I don't think justification comes into it as it's not in the rules. As the rules stand it's either violent conduct(or use of excessive force or whatever else it covers), which carries a 3 game ban or it's not violent conduct and there is simply no ban justified in the rules. There isn't currently a lesser charge you can get it reduced to that would still inolve a ban which is why I said I don't think you have a case. Chelsea could list as many incidents they judge similar or worse that didn't get any punishment but it doesn't matter a jot because the FA hide behind the technicality of those incidents being seen. The only reds for violent conduct that I've seen overturned are where the opposition player has been shown in replays to have either faked the incident(player goes down clutching their face) or massively exaggerated the contact, neither of which really apply here. That's why I think it's clever from Chelsea as I don't think there's anyway the 3 game ban could be reduced but they still have that slim hope that the ban could be overturned without the risk of an extra game being tagged on. More than anything I think Chelsea are simply trying to keep up the pressure on the FA here as their rules are being quite clearly exposed as not fit for purpose.
Yid is right, justification doesn't come into it. It should, but it doesn't. There isn't any sort of common sense invoked in these rulings, just one blanket rule that covers everything they consider "violent conduct". In my opinion whats happening now is the PL are weighing up the media backlash and fan fallout from keeping Matic's ban, against the perceived "precedent" it would set to over turn it, and is trying to figure out which will be least damaging in the long run. I suspect what will happen is the ban will stand, then in a week or so we will get some sort of statement from some official stating the rules are to be reviewed in the summer.
Over one hundred years to refine the rules, over one hundred years of getting to eat free big dinners and looking the other way.
