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

[DJ NOBO]

Weve got two other forwards of similar quality, we'll be ok.
I certainly don't think it will be a defining moment if he gets banned

 

[The Rivet]

A precedent, maybe?

Indeed a comparison also.

 

[Bozza]

Definitive from the club. Apologies to those who were hoping otherwise:

The FA’s 3 person panel has already reached a unanimous verdict based on reviewing video evidence, as the referee will have confirmed he and his officials didn’t see it at the time of the incident, hence the charge today.

We now have to decide whether to accept the charge as it has been set out - and a 3 game ban for Hemed - or appeal the charge which allows us to present mitigation but also risks a further match being added if the appeal is considered to be frivolous.

The decision whether to appeal an FA charge in situations like this is one that the Chis Hughton and Paul Barber take together.

 

[Nixonator]

Oh what a surprise.

 

[spence]

Certainly cannot be considered frivolous and so it's worth appealing not that it will do any good. Adam Virgo's red at Southend was frivolous

 

[portlock seagull]

This is why we need a squad. Because players do stupid things and or get mistakenly punished. How on earth Lineaker got through his entire career given the latter is one of the wonders of the modern football world.

Don't appeal. Decision already made by the League.

 

[The Rivet]

I think our tech savvy younger fans should bombard the FA will historical references/video where worse events escape any punishment at all. Just to annoy them. Petty? yep I guess but, what the hell.

 

[Bry Nylon]

If Paul Barber writes the mitigation the panel will still be reading it after the next international break.

 

[The Antikythera Mechanism]

But if you're gonna compare one you may as well compare every decision the fa make. Pointless. It ain't personal.

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

It’s just that English law is based on precedents, so it wouldn’t be unreasonable for this to roll down into the English FA rule book. Obviously it looks like the FA have made their own laws and rules.

 

[Bozza]

I've just read the Argus article. I've no idea which way Andy has interpreted it, but it does read as though he believes the review panel is still to happen, when it already has.

 

[Bry Nylon]

... it looks like the FA have made their own laws and rules.

Don't need to be Johnathan Creek to work that one out.

 

[Bry Nylon]

Duplicate post

 

[LamieRobertson]

Don't forget chaps, this was also a 3 match ban:-

Are you really saying the two are comparable?

 

[MORTY]

Do we honestly expect the FA to ever come out in our favour, I doubt it very much.

Careful - you'll start sounding like a Newcastle fan.

 

[Surrey Phil]

Is there any way if found guilty he could get a lessor ban say 1 game as that would seem more appropriate?

 

[Richy_Seagull]

Is there any way if found guilty he could get a lessor ban say 1 game as that would seem more appropriate?

Nope - violent conduct is 3 games.

 

[n1 gull]

If 3 refs say its a stamp I can't see the need for an appeal its not as if another one is going to go against his mates

 

[essbee1]

To me it looks very clumsy - but is not a deliberate stamp. Body language is very different
to your usual "make it look unsuspicious" sort of thing. That makes it look anything
but unsuspicious usually.

 

[Two Professors]

Can they introduce Yedlin's leg into mitigation.I'm sure a stamp would have left heavy bruising.Doesn't necessarily have to be attached to Yedlin!

 

[Bozza]

Should be relativly straightforward for the club to prove it was not a stamp. They must have data on the average stride length of Hemed and the velocity if his leg when it comes down in lots of different situations. It should not be so hard to prove that the foot came down with a higher than normal force onto the player. With that you can show it is not a stamp.

Blimey.