Fulham Suspensions
- Thread starter lincs22
- Start date
ladbroke8745
RefChat Addict
Looks quite damning doesn't it..
People trying to compare to Fernandes the other week.
I can't see a direct comparison.
I'm not saying Fernandes should have or shouldn't have touched the assistant, but we don't have any verbal in any of the images seen. By this I mean, how do we know that Bruno isn't saying "get out of the way" or similar. All people are showing is the actual hand in back moment and not the seconds before. I don't even see any aggression from Fernandes if I'm honest. And clearly the assistant doesn't too.
For Mitrovic, I'm actually thinking he must've said something quite serious first and foremost (did he call him a cheat maybe, something worse?). As CK was ignoring him, he then, more or less, drags him back by pulling his shoulder - regardless of strength used. And clearly says something again at the time CK is again reaching for his card.
People have said he was itching to get a reason to send him off, hand was over his pocket. Of course it was. He just put the red away from sending Willian off.
Mitrovic, I think, needs to see a ban similar to the Di Canio incident.
This story is worldwide it seems and will clearly show to those keeping a close eye on it that it is not acceptable.
People trying to compare to Fernandes the other week.
I can't see a direct comparison.
I'm not saying Fernandes should have or shouldn't have touched the assistant, but we don't have any verbal in any of the images seen. By this I mean, how do we know that Bruno isn't saying "get out of the way" or similar. All people are showing is the actual hand in back moment and not the seconds before. I don't even see any aggression from Fernandes if I'm honest. And clearly the assistant doesn't too.
For Mitrovic, I'm actually thinking he must've said something quite serious first and foremost (did he call him a cheat maybe, something worse?). As CK was ignoring him, he then, more or less, drags him back by pulling his shoulder - regardless of strength used. And clearly says something again at the time CK is again reaching for his card.
People have said he was itching to get a reason to send him off, hand was over his pocket. Of course it was. He just put the red away from sending Willian off.
Mitrovic, I think, needs to see a ban similar to the Di Canio incident.
This story is worldwide it seems and will clearly show to those keeping a close eye on it that it is not acceptable.
I think Fernandes should have been sent off, but the standard 3 game suspension would have been sufficient in that case. He makes unnecessary contact with a match official and with some force, but to a lesser degree than Mitrovic.
If Fernandes had been given 3 games off and Mitrovic now gets ~10 games, that would have looked like taking both incidents seriously, while also still acknowledging the difference in aggression between them.
Unfortunately, because Fernandes was missed, I worry that 0 games for him and 10 games for Mitrovic will feel like too big a distinction to make between two incidents that were in reality, not miles apart. Which means rationale exists for them to bottle it and only give him the standard suspension or a very small additional punishment.
If Fernandes had been given 3 games off and Mitrovic now gets ~10 games, that would have looked like taking both incidents seriously, while also still acknowledging the difference in aggression between them.
Unfortunately, because Fernandes was missed, I worry that 0 games for him and 10 games for Mitrovic will feel like too big a distinction to make between two incidents that were in reality, not miles apart. Which means rationale exists for them to bottle it and only give him the standard suspension or a very small additional punishment.
Last edited:
Kes
I'll Decide ...
I'd agree.
The Fernandes incident was simply a petulant gesture of dissent whereas Mitrovic's actions were deliberately aggressive and confrontational.
I'm hoping he gets a punishment suitable for any player who thinks it's acceptable to behave like that.
mctones
Member
Spinning on a head of a pin I accept, but whatever Fernandes did it was certainly not dissent (protest or disagreement with a match officials decision).
I agree with GraemeS, Fernandes should have been red card and 3 game minimum suspension (although noting again FA disciplinary code I posted above, this would probably sit at the 112 days level imho). Mitrovic was more aggressive, so warrants a longer suspension. I would also run his verbal insults as consecutive rather than concurrent.
Ultimately for me it comes down to whether you agree or disagree that it is acceptable to deliberately lay your hands on a match official. I would rather see zero tolerance and not introduce grey areas.
Kes
I'll Decide ...
Nah. Petulant and a dissentful act by giving the AR a little push out of his way as he ran off. Not even broadly comparable for me.
I get what @Kes is saying, in that the "reason" for the push was that Fernandes was annoyed by the official not giving him the decision and also was arguably annoyed by the official physically intervening to stop him getting into a wresting match with the opponent.
But this is a rare case of actual simultaneous offences - he dissented by making aggressive and unnecessary contact with a match official. Committing both a yellow card and red card offence in one action, so the red card should have been the result.
But this is a rare case of actual simultaneous offences - he dissented by making aggressive and unnecessary contact with a match official. Committing both a yellow card and red card offence in one action, so the red card should have been the result.
What you've quoted is from the section of the disciplinary regulations which applies to Steps 5-7 and all other grassroots football outside the NLS - there is a separate section of the regulations which covers Step 4 and above, which doesn't include the guidelines regarding offences against match officials.
Seems like the LOTG needs to recognize contact (and non-contact) offences with Match Officials as separate offences from OFFINABUS and VC etc.
Mitrovic has been charged with VC. Arguably, he's not guilty of VC as such because the push was relatively soft. It's the totally unacceptable intimidation that followed which aggravates the overall crime, making it a gold plated opportunity for the authorities to send out a message
Mitrovic has been charged with VC. Arguably, he's not guilty of VC as such because the push was relatively soft. It's the totally unacceptable intimidation that followed which aggravates the overall crime, making it a gold plated opportunity for the authorities to send out a message
It is the leading with Mitrovic's head that does it for me. Mitrovic leans his head in towards Chris Kavanagh who bends backwards whilst walking backwards to avoid the head to head pushy thing players do. Chris Kavanagh was egoless and he reacted superbly to an unbelievable amount of intimidation and attempts at escalation.
The fact that anyone would argue grabbing an official and then walking towards them with your head forward as they have to limbo dance their way out of the situation isn't violent conduct blows my mind.
Seriously? If Kavanagh had stood his ground and not backed away they would have been head to head.
deusex
RefChat Addict
Two incidents were absolute miles apart.
The fact that the FA have overturned the Nunes (Wolves) suspension today, an unused sub sent off for barging and verbally abusing the assistant, gives me absolutely no confidence that Mitrovic will receive any kind of punishment. Just look at this image of him having to be held back from confronting the AR, by of all people Diego Costa, says it all really.
I suspect Fulham will wheel out their bigwig lawyers, the appeal panel will panic, and Mitrovic will get, at the very most 4 or 5 games. Hope I am wrong, but this Wolves decision sends out all of the wrong messages.
I suspect Fulham will wheel out their bigwig lawyers, the appeal panel will panic, and Mitrovic will get, at the very most 4 or 5 games. Hope I am wrong, but this Wolves decision sends out all of the wrong messages.
We all know at the top levels, foul and abusive language very rarely gets punished and the footage I seen showed he barely made any contact with the assistant and that was seemingly the reason he got sent off in the first place so whilst it's an unsatisfactory outcome, I am not surprised Wolves won the appeal personally.
As for Mitrovic, well I suppose the defense lawyers will emphasize the contact on the official was not forceful/severe and will go down the line of big game, big occasion, fairly big prize on offer for a club like Fulham etc, hopefully the FA won't fall for it but part of me do feel 10 games could be extreme. Hopefully an outcome will be released soon.
one
RefChat Addict
Though I think CK did the right thing by backing away, I would have loved for him to have stood his ground. That would have left no excuse for anyone not to support a ban that looks upwards of a year.
So what are you suggesting would have been appropriate? He chose to unnecessarily shove an official with force because he was having a tantrum over not being given a throw-in - I'm baffled that anyone on here thinks they'd do anything less than immediately dismiss if that happened to them.
They're different yes - which is why 3 matches for him and 10 for Mitrovic is where I'd pitch the suspensions.
The suspension will surely be in the 6 to 12 game range and it needs to be. Outside of making contact with official the contact was much more forceful than Fernandes', and then there was the aggressive "in your face" posturing as further aggravation.
I've some experience with sporting tribunals (represented and advised athletes in them) and their are problems for both the prosecution and defence. For the prosecution, firstly the officials and subsequently the FA took zero action against Fernandes. Different offence but an offence all the same (and certainly one I feel warranted a red card). Secondly, officials and the FA allow the crowding of the referee the whole time with little consequence, which in turn allows an attitude to permeate that it's okay. If you tolerate behaviour that is very close to the line (indeed arguably well above it) it makes it harder to make an example of someone who crosses it.
For the defence, the challenge is outside of the above points there is little mitigation. I'm sure they'll point to the penalty that was awarded for the push in the back by Shaw, but the decision to award a penalty and dismiss Willian was so clearly the correct one. If the defence had any sense they'd be looking to a plea bargain (or an "agreed sanction") so whilst I feel the offence absolutely justifies 10 to 12 games, I think a conditional acceptance of the charge (based on 6 matches) would be the way to go and most likely scenario, however unsatisfactory that is.
I've some experience with sporting tribunals (represented and advised athletes in them) and their are problems for both the prosecution and defence. For the prosecution, firstly the officials and subsequently the FA took zero action against Fernandes. Different offence but an offence all the same (and certainly one I feel warranted a red card). Secondly, officials and the FA allow the crowding of the referee the whole time with little consequence, which in turn allows an attitude to permeate that it's okay. If you tolerate behaviour that is very close to the line (indeed arguably well above it) it makes it harder to make an example of someone who crosses it.
For the defence, the challenge is outside of the above points there is little mitigation. I'm sure they'll point to the penalty that was awarded for the push in the back by Shaw, but the decision to award a penalty and dismiss Willian was so clearly the correct one. If the defence had any sense they'd be looking to a plea bargain (or an "agreed sanction") so whilst I feel the offence absolutely justifies 10 to 12 games, I think a conditional acceptance of the charge (based on 6 matches) would be the way to go and most likely scenario, however unsatisfactory that is.
RefIADad
RefChat Addict
The suspension should be for the rest of the season. 10 games seems right, and by adding just one more game you have very different optics when you hear “rest of the season”.
I’m guessing it will be six. Anything less, and every grassroots referee in England should protest by banding together and not working matches the next weekend or two. A standard suspension basically means the FA does not care about abusive or physical behavior toward match officials.
I’m guessing it will be six. Anything less, and every grassroots referee in England should protest by banding together and not working matches the next weekend or two. A standard suspension basically means the FA does not care about abusive or physical behavior toward match officials.
The FA have already said/alleged that the standard punishment is insufficient.
It now goes to an independent panel to be decided.