Thank you for contacting the Football Association. * The ability to submit a claim of wrongful dismissal is an exceptional facility that allows Clubs to challenge the dismissal of a player when a serious and obvious error has taken place.* Under guidelines from FIFA a Regulatory Commission must apply the test of whether a serious and obvious error has taken place.* The Club has to submit clear and conclusive evidence that a wrongful dismissal has taken place.* When such evidence is inconclusive the Regulatory Commission has no alternative but to dismiss the claim. * Best wishes, John Stanley | Customer Relations The Football Association --- So he is saying that we didn't have enough evidence!? There was about 10 different sky camera angles!
They are useless incompetent ****s mate, if there was a way I could have nothing to do with them but continue to support my team, I would.
The reason the appeal failed was because Lee Mason would not change his original decision, regardless of what evidence we supplied. No doubt every camera shot from every angle was used but Mason will argue that Derry 'fingered' Young's shirt and the resulting pirouette with triple salkos was as result of that 'foul', regardless of the fact that a five year old child wouldn't go down as a result of such a contact. Mason is typical of someone who compounds a bad decision by refusing to see that the 'simulation' is the bigger 'foul' and such decisions make players like Young serial cheats...
Frankly, I am amazed you got a reply. The only way to change the FA is for all fans to boycott football until the more ridiculous aspects of the game are sorted eg goal line technology, diving etc. If the next season kicked off to the 'roar' of empty stadia, that would soon hasten change. As that is never going to happen, we can moan, whinge and gripe but that is all we can do.
The independent says the FA are just as mystified as we are as to why the appeal wasnt upheld. It was the 3 man mystery panel who did it. They should be named and shamed and removed from their position.
What did you expect? Thank you for contacting the Football Association. * The ability to submit a claim of wrongful dismissal is an exceptional facility that allows Clubs to challenge the dismissal of a player when a serious and obvious error has taken place.* Under guidelines from FIFA a Regulatory Commission must apply the test of whether a serious and obvious error has taken place.* The Club has to submit clear and conclusive evidence that a wrongful dismissal has taken place. * In the light of your complaint we have reviewed the evidence and have also noted the report of the referee. We now see that Mr Mason is a complete tosser and is not worthy of being a professional referee in the Premiership. He will be stripped naked and flogged in front of the crowd during half time at your next home match after which he will be sent to officate at Blue Square matches. * We have also sent Mr Derry a bottle of champagne, a tin of Cadbury's Roses and two complimentary tickets to be in the audience of the Grand Final of Britain's Got Talent. * Ashely Young will be reprimanded and told not to do it again. (Oops, too late with that one.) * Just don't expect us to say "sorry". * Best wishes, John Stanley | Customer Relations The Football Association
This was someone else's reply: Thank you for contacting The Football Association. In relation to the Commission’s decision regarding Shaun Derry, the ability to submit a claim of wrongful dismissal is an exceptional facility that allows Clubs to challenge the dismissal of a player when a serious and obvious error has taken place. Under guidelines from FIFA a Regulatory Commission must apply the test of whether a serious and obvious error has taken place. The Club has to submit clear and conclusive evidence that a wrongful dismissal has taken place. When such evidence is inconclusive the Regulatory Commission has no alternative but to dismiss the claim. Retrospective action in relation to the incident involving Mario Balotelli of Manchester City and Alex Song of Arsenal, which occurred in the 20th minute of Sunday’s game, will not be taken. Where at least one of the officials has seen the coming together of players retrospective action is not taken, regardless of whether they have seen the full extent of the challenge. Retrospective action can only be taken in scenarios where none of the Match Officials saw the players coming together. The normal scenarios in which retrospective action is taken are for ‘off the ball’ incidents. Retrospective action was introduced for off the ball incidents where there was no contest for possession and could not be deemed to be re-refereeing an incident. In agreement with FIFA, this is how ‘not seen’ incidents are dealt with retrospectively in England. It is a policy that is agreed with all football stakeholders.
Stakeholders. Says it all. But how can they say the above when they do look at incidents retrospectively when it involved racism, in mid-play? And surely retrospective video footage from multiple angles is better even than two officials saying they'd seen something?
