If an element of the offence is bringing the game into disrepute, the level of exposure is a material factor.
If Pardew's got anything at all about him, he'll serve his stadium ban in a helicopter, hovering over the game with a megaphone.
A player diving brings the game in to disrepute. Does that mean premier league palyers should receive a more severe punishment than a league two player for diving?
It and other things, but in the opnion of the decision makers, it's not as significant a part of the offence.
https://www.anybots.com/ If he was really serious about it he would get one of these. 'Short of being face-to-face, Anybots, Inc. offers the most interactive form of communication available today by providing the user a personal remote avatar. With Anybots, you can instantly be immersed in a distant environment experiencing the forefront of a new class of communication called mobile telepresence, allowing you to never miss an important event, meeting, or experience again'.
It should be though, what Pardew did was unacceptable but didn't affect the outcome of the game. Diving win's penalties, results in red cards etc which in turn costs clubs points and potentially millions of pounds. But lets be honest the FA are one of either the most corrupt or inept organisations around.
Just out of interest. http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/26548426 "Joss Labadie: Torquay midfielder handed 10-game ban for biting Torquay midfielder Joss Labadie has been banned for 10 games and fined £2,000 after the Football Association found him guilty of biting an opponent. The incident occurred in the Gulls' 3-1 loss to Chesterfield but Labadie - who denied the charge - was not punished during the game. Labadie's ban is the same as that given to Liverpool striker Luis Suarez for biting Chelsea's Branislav Ivanovic. Torquay have until 12:00 GMT on Monday, 17 March to appeal. The Gulls, who say they are considering an appeal, are bottom of League Two, seven points adrift of safety with 11 games of the season to go, with Labadie having made nine appearances since joining from Notts County in January. Joss Labadie's loss would be a big blow to a side already staring relegation squarely in the face. While Labadie's impact on the Gulls this season since rejoining for a second spell has not been as pronounced as his first, when he scored four goals to help them survive relegation, he did get the winner in Tuesday's victory over Rochdale. But he has been a fixture in midfield since coming back and his signing was one of the few bright points for Torquay since the start of 2014. Gulls boss Chris Hargreaves now needs to find someone to fill Labadie's void, and quickly, with the club seven points from safety and games running out. Chesterfield declined to make an official complaint, but Spireites player Ollie Banks made allegations on Twitter that he had been bitten during the game. Speaking last week, Gulls boss Chris Hargreaves said he felt Labadie should not have been charged for the incident, which referee Carl Boyeson did not spot at the time, in the first instance. "It's a denial from the club and from myself of any wrongdoing," Hargreaves told BBC Radio Devon. "From what I've seen, I don't know how they can get to that conclusion." Labadie, 23, scored the winner in his side's 2-1 win over Rochdale on Tuesday. Suarez's ban made headlines around the world after he was caught on television camera biting the arm of Ivanovic in the Premier League last season, although the Uruguayan was also banned for seven games in 2010 when playing for Ajax for a similar incident in which he bit PSV Eindhoven midfielder Otman Bakkal's shoulder. While Labadie's offence took place in the less high-profile surroundings of League Two, the former Tranmere midfielder has received exactly the same length of suspension from the FA."
Plus it was a player on a player. Not a manager on an opposition player. Entirely ****ing different. Jesus wept, are you looking for a stupidity award?
Here's the link seeing as you're either too lazy or too stupid to look it up. http://www.exeterexpressandecho.co....ates-heabutt/story-20738068-detail/story.html
****, not the **** Mark Yates that played for us then! Either way, this particular action wasn't beamed around around the world. The fact that most people haven't even heard of it underlines that fact, on the other hand every ****er knows what Pardew did.
The fact you have to do research underlines the point doesn't it? No one was using Mark Yates and whatever tin pot club he manages as an example? Every ****er knows what Pardew did because it was live and televised, therein lies the difference.
No the point was you said there wasn't a precedent for this offence and there is. As I said earlier, does a judge sentence a murderer based on how many witnesses there are? Of course not, one witness or 100 the offence is still the same. Now pull your pants back up.
It was classed as a "non standard" offence. Nothing was mentioned about whether there was a precedent for it. To be fair lads, I think this thread has now run it's course. Pardew's been banned, it's a fair ban given his previous and I think most agree on that (apart from those claiming he should be dismissed). Good luck in the cup
