Hemed stamp [Charged, appealed, banned for 3 games]

[dazzer6666]

I think you're reading it wrong. The FA statement says:

"Off the ball incidents which are not seen at the time by the match officials are referred to a panel of three former elite referees.

"Each referee panel member will review the video footage independently of one another to determine whether they consider it a sending-off offence.

"For retrospective action to be taken, and an FA charge to follow, the decision of the panel must be unanimous."

He has been charged. So surely the review has taken place and a unanimous "guilty" decision reached.

Ok thanks. He's fu**ed then.

 

[The Camel]

There isn't enough evidence to convict him in a court of law, but on balance of probability it is likely it was deliberate stamp.

 

[Bozza]

Ok thanks. He's fu**ed then.

That's only my interpretation, but I don't see how he can be charged with violent misconduct unless the review had already happened.

 

[Gazz15]

Gonna be a certain 3 game ban, a timely reminder to all that everything is analysed under the microscope in the Premier League!

 

[Bozza]

Gonna be a certain 3 game ban, a timely reminder to all that everything is analysed under the microscope in the Premier League!

Also that a fair few people on here need to get the prescription of their blue and white striped glasses checked out, I'm afraid.

 

[pb21]

Oh FFS, how can three people come to a unanimous decision based on the 'evidence' available, it's not clear cut that it is either deliberate or not.

 

[Raleigh Chopper]

That's only my interpretation, but I don't see how he can be charged with violent misconduct unless the review had already happened.

So why has the punishment not been dished out then, or is that done by another panel of Blazers later on.
If he has been charged then the ban should be announced straight away.
I read it as there is a case to answer for so the 3 refs will look at it.
You can be charged with murder but if the court finds you not guilty then you walk away a free man.

 

[dazzer6666]

Also that a fair few people on here need to get the prescription of their blue and white striped glasses checked out, I'm afraid.

It was a 'step' more than a proper 'stamp', but it was deliberate. Whether it was a red card offence I don't know, but for it to carry the same punishment as the Britos 'tackle' is laughable.

 

[Postman Pat]

That's only my interpretation, but I don't see how he can be charged with violent misconduct unless the review had already happened.

Naylor implying that decision hasn't been made yet: Brighton and Hove Albion striker Tomer Hemed facing trial by three-man former refs panel over incident with Newcastle United's DeAndre Yedlin

 

[The Large One]

I think you're reading it wrong. The FA statement says:

"Off the ball incidents which are not seen at the time by the match officials are referred to a panel of three former elite referees.

"Each referee panel member will review the video footage independently of one another to determine whether they consider it a sending-off offence.

"For retrospective action to be taken, and an FA charge to follow, the decision of the panel must be unanimous."

He has been charged. So surely the review has taken place and a unanimous "guilty" decision reached.

Something which ought to be challenged in law, as this is finding someone guilty BEFORE charging them. Even sport can't rise above the law in matters of issues restriction of working practices.

I'll let go of those straws now.

 

[Bozza]

So why has the punishment not been dished out then, or is that done by another panel of Blazers later on.
If he has been charged then the ban should be announced straight away.
I read it as there is a case to answer for so the 3 refs will look at it.

Because he has until tomorrow to respond, presumably to try and present something mitigating.

Again: all my interpretation, however.

 

[The Rivet]

That's only my interpretation, but I don't see how he can be charged with violent misconduct unless the review had already happened.

So if the independent panel voted and he was charged why not the sentence announced at the same time? Everyone knows it is an auto 3 game ban, why delay?

Just seen your response above. Confusing.

 

[The Large One]

So why has the punishment not been dished out then, or is that done by another panel of Blazers later on.
If he has been charged then the ban should be announced straight away.
I read it as there is a case to answer for so the 3 refs will look at it.

Even the FA isn't cruel enough to not let this go through without him having the opportunity to defend himself or make a statement. Which he has until 6pm tomorrow to do.

 

[Bozza]

Something which ought to be challenged in law, as this is finding someone guilty BEFORE charging them. Even sport can't rise above the law in matters of issues restriction of working practices.

I'll let go of those straws now.

Not sure what you're saying. My view of the sequencing is this...

1. Panel reviewed footage.
2. FA found all panel members agreed on 'guilt'.
3. Charge issued.

To follow.

4. Hemed has chance to respond.
5. Ban issued / not issued depending on response. (I can't see how a ban won't be issued in this case)

 

[worthingseagull123]

At least if he does get banned, it will be for 3 games I didn't expect us to get anything in.

 

[samtheseagull]

Laughable when you think what Joey Barton got away with on Kayal.

 

[Tooting Gull]

He can be charged. But he hasn't been banned already, as The Sun stated in the headline. The charge triggers the hearing, at which Hemed could either plead guilty, or throw the kitchen sink at defending himself, which I am sure and trust the club will do. There are plenty of opportunities to raise doubt about the intent aspect with the panel. And if after that he still gets done, we did everything we could.

 

[GJN1]

He's gone for three games. These things are never overturned.

 

[Bozza]

So if the independent panel voted and he was charged why not the sentence announced at the same time? Everyone knows it is an auto 3 game ban, why delay?

Just seen your response above. Confusing.

There is no delay. As you say, there's no need to announce the "sentence" because violent conduct is a three game ban.

 

[dingodan]

Not sure if this has been posted already, interesting discussion on this here:

Panel divided 2/2.