Virgo non intacto

[severnside gull]

McNulty certainly rates himself as a centre back but if we did need to play him there we would have no cover at left back (at least until Livermore is back). Let's hope Elphick gets lucky for a few games!

As for the appeal - it was always pointless and ill advised inviting the treatment it got - just my opinion like

 

[sten_super]

I'm sorry, but it was a completely frivolous appeal. The red card was for violent conduct, they were clearly both behaving in a violent fashion. No idea why the club appealed it, but they clearly shouldn't have. I like the FA iniative; it was becoming common beforehand for all red cards to be appealed on principle; it's put a stop to that.

 

[Acker79]

I'm sorry, but it was a completely frivolous appeal. The red card was for violent conduct, they were clearly both behaving in a violent fashion. No idea why the club appealed it, but they clearly shouldn't have. I like the FA iniative; it was becoming common beforehand for all red cards to be appealed on principle; it's put a stop to that.

Agreed. Akinfenwa fouled El Abd, why did he fight with Virgo? Was Akinfenwa on a rampage, took out one of our players then went for another? No. Virgo challenged him, he instigated a wrestling match, and Brighton's position? 'Virgo didn't throw a punch'. Big whoop.

It was a frivolous appeal, a complete waste of time.

Either Dean White is an idiot, or he's a genius - that's now five games he doesn't have to pick Virgo for!

 

[Jam The Man]

I'm sorry, but it was a completely frivolous appeal. The red card was for violent conduct, they were clearly both behaving in a violent fashion. No idea why the club appealed it, but they clearly shouldn't have. I like the FA iniative; it was becoming common beforehand for all red cards to be appealed on principle; it's put a stop to that.

Have you actually seen it again on the box? Hardly violent conduct - more like handbags and self defense in my view.

And even if it was still to be kept as a ban (which i could swallow) why punish a club even further, when we haven't appealed such a matter before? It's overkill to put it lightly...

 

[Jam The Man]

oh well.. looks like there's a lot of agreeing to disagreeing going to be happening on this one.

 

[sten_super]

Have you actually seen it again on the box? Hardly violent conduct - more like handbags and self defense in my view.

And even if it was still to be kept as a ban (which i could swallow) why punish a club even further, when we haven't appealed such a matter before? It's overkill to put it lightly...

I'm a bad fan, wasn't at the game, so have ONLY seen the replays. The two players are wrestling; you can argue at the time that they haven't done enough to merit red cards, but you cannot argue that they are not guilty of violent behaviour. Saying 'yes he did do it, but it wasn't severe enough' is not a defense that is admissable in appeals; that is why red cards cannot be downgraded to yellows. Appeals are only successful if the player was not guilty of the transgression at all.

The point of adding a game on (which is a standard punishment, for frivolous appeals, and not related to which club it is, or how many times they've done it before) is to stop clubs wasting time by appealing when there is no case to answer. On this occasion, there is clearly no case to answer (as I've explained above), and ergo it is a frivolous appeal.

Whoever decided upon the appeal at the club is clearly not up on the rules for appeals, which is something that IMO needs to be sorted.

 

[glasfryn]

If that was Frank Lampard and Steven Gerrard you can guarantee they would have got off scot free

or anyone in a MU shirt

 

[severnside gull]

Whoever decided upon the appeal at the club is clearly not up on the rules for appeals, which is something that IMO needs to be sorted.

Let's hope we don't make him manager !!

 

[Jam The Man]

I'm a bad fan, wasn't at the game, so have ONLY seen the replays. The two players are wrestling; you can argue at the time that they haven't done enough to merit red cards, but you cannot argue that they are not guilty of violent behaviour. Saying 'yes he did do it, but it wasn't severe enough' is not a defense that is admissable in appeals; that is why red cards cannot be downgraded to yellows. Appeals are only successful if the player was not guilty of the transgression at all.

The point of adding a game on (which is a standard punishment, for frivolous appeals, and not related to which club it is, or how many times they've done it before) is to stop clubs wasting time by appealing when there is no case to answer. On this occasion, there is clearly no case to answer (as I've explained above), and ergo it is a frivolous appeal.

Whoever decided upon the appeal at the club is clearly not up on the rules for appeals, which is something that IMO needs to be sorted.

Fair do's with your views... it just seems too harsh in the circs IMO.

 

[kingstn seagull]

Is Whing also injured?

 

[Silent Bob]

Is Whing also injured?

According to the official site. He was only just fit for Tuesday.
Three at the back on Saturday?

 

[Skint Gull]

f*** the FA's rules on bans, it's a crock of shit. Anyone can see that was a case of handbags at dawn so it should never have been a sending off. How can you call that violent conduct, it was a bloody 'love in'!

I'm just about the least violent person ever but it's obvious that was just a bit of grabbing and pushing. How about the FA just let what is a physical game remain that way and if players confront each other so be it, so long as no punches, kicks or elbows are thrown what harm is done?

 

[Cadiz Seagull]

I've only seen it on Seagulls World and while it didn't look particularly violent, part handbags part wrestling - I would have thought it was a sending off offence for both. At least, way back when i was refereeing I would have sent both of them off.

Can't think why the club thought it worth an appeal though. pretty starightforward red IIMHO

 

[Langley]

Just shows the FA to be total PRATS, look how they treated Luton Bournemouth and Rotherham. One law for the Prem and another for us.

 

[sten_super]

Just shows the FA to be total PRATS, look how they treated Luton Bournemouth and Rotherham. One law for the Prem and another for us.

er, Aliadiere of Middlesborough got a ban extended for a frivolous appeal, off the top of my head. So it happens there too.

 

[Storer68]

It was violent conduct. Automatic red card is the only option allowed to the ref, so he has no option to apply any other law. So the appeal had no chance of succeeding. F@@@g waste of the FA's time IMHO

This from the FA

Wednesday 25 February 2009

Adam Virgo, Brighton & Hove Albion FC
Brighton & Hove Albion FC v Northampton Town FC
Football League One, 24 February 2009
Dismissed for violent conduct

Result: Claim for wrongful dismissal rejected - five match suspension (second dismissal of the season and extra one match due to having no prospect of success) with immediate effect


Adebayo Akinfenwa, Northampton Town FC
Brighton & Hove Albion FC v Northampton Town FC
Football League One, 24 February 2009
Dismissed for violent conduct

Result: Claim for wrongful dismissal rejected and deemed as having no prospect of success - four match suspension (extra one match due to having no prospect of success) with immediate effect


Sending-Off Offences

A player, substitute or substituted player is sent off and shown the red card if he commits any of the following seven offences:

is guilty of serious foul play
is guilty of violent conduct
spits at an opponent or any other person
denies the opposing team a goal or an obvious goalscoring opportunity by deliberately handling the ball (this does not apply to a goalkeeper within his own penalty area)
denies an obvious goalscoring opportunity to an opponent moving towards the player’s goal by an offence punishable by a free kick or a penalty kick
uses offensive or insulting or abusive language and/or gestures
receives a second caution in the same match
A player, substitute or substituted player who has been sent off and shown the red card must leave the vicinity of the field of play and the technical area.

Decisions of the International FA Board

Decision 1

A player who commits a cautionable or sending-off offence, either on or off the field of play, whether directed towards an opponent, a team-mate, the referee, an assistant referee or any other person, is disciplined according to the nature of the offence committed.

Sending-Off Offences

A player, substitute or substituted player is sent off and shown the red card if he commits any of the following seven offences:

is guilty of serious foul play
is guilty of violent conduct
spits at an opponent or any other person
denies the opposing team a goal or an obvious goalscoring opportunity by deliberately handling the ball (this does not apply to a goalkeeper within his own penalty area)
denies an obvious goalscoring opportunity to an opponent moving towards the player’s goal by an offence punishable by a free kick or a penalty kick
uses offensive or insulting or abusive language and/or gestures
receives a second caution in the same match
A player, substitute or substituted player who has been sent off and shown the red card must leave the vicinity of the field of play and the technical area.

Decisions of the International FA Board

Decision 1

A player who commits a cautionable or sending-off offence, either on or off the field of play, whether directed towards an opponent, a team-mate, the referee, an assistant referee or any other person, is disciplined according to the nature of the offence committed.

 

[Storer68]

f*** the FA's rules on bans, it's a crock of shit. Anyone can see that was a case of handbags at dawn so it should never have been a sending off. How can you call that violent conduct, it was a bloody 'love in'!

I'm just about the least violent person ever but it's obvious that was just a bit of grabbing and pushing. How about the FA just let what is a physical game remain that way and if players confront each other so be it, so long as no punches, kicks or elbows are thrown what harm is done?

raising your hands to an opponent's face is violent conduct. Automatic red card

 

[O Lads]

(Quote) We simply wasted the FA time hence the increase ban. Clubs can not simply appeal every red card they get. (Quote)

Thing is we DON'T appeal every red card we get. For some reason this has made me so angry as I reckon it's just wrong... even if there was some doubt, he doesn't deserve to have an extra game added on due to the FA cowardly calling it frivolous. It's because they couldn't be arsed to properly hear the appeal probably...

Surely it's f***ing obvious that if nobody were ever punished for making an incorrect appeal, which ours was, then us and everybody else would appeal everything.

 

[Jam The Man]

Surely it's f***ing obvious that if nobody were ever punished for making an incorrect appeal, which ours was, then us and everybody else would appeal everything.

Maybe it's 'f***ing' not

 

[seagullsovergrimsby]

Steve Cook can be used in the back 4 if needed.
Does it also cost the club £500 to lodge an appeal with the FA ?