Vardy & LCFC Charged by the FA - Charges Accepted & Personal Hearing Requested

[Captain...]

 

The  incident again, he gets up pretty quick says something to the ref and walks off, I think it will count in his favour that he didn't cause a scene or refuse to leave the pitch.

 

You can also see that he is tugged towards the defender, but the ref can't see that. There is also no way any lip reader can tell what he says from that footage.
 

[Les-TA-Jon]

We all know from the footage that Vardy aggresively jabbed at Moss and the theories are that he said "You're a fvcking cvnt!". 

 

Regardless of anything else - yellow or not, dive or not, decision give one way or not - surely if a player does that to the ref it'd be a straight red anyhow. So the question is, what would a ban be for that anyhow? It's 3 matches for violent conduct right? What would it be such extreme dissent? Just one?

[Lionator]

 

The  incident again, he gets up pretty quick says something to the ref and walks off, I think it will count in his favour that he didn't cause a scene or refuse to leave the pitch.

 

You can also see that he is tugged towards the defender, but the ref can't see that. There is also no way any lip reader can tell what he says from that footage.

 

 

If he's called the ref the c-bomb and the ref has heard that and reported it then that's definitive evidence.  

[Babylon]

In the Gabriel and Costa cases they also looked at how long the player took to leave the pitch. Vardy was quite quick compared to those two... He does his point...walk away and then came back for a bit more of a two work expletive and then went straight off.

I'd say he's looking at a big fine and just the 1 match ban. Woy has saved him

Costa didn't swear though, Vardy did we're told... different things. 

[jayfox26]

If Vardy didn't play for Leicester would we like him? He's not a very likable character is he? He comes across as a classless scrubber but I thoroughly respect the way he's succeeded in his life. I wish I had his determination. But I can see why the general feeling is of dislike to the man as he's just a weasel and there's now been a few things to compound this opinion for folk.

He's ours though and I love him, warts and all. That doesn't mean he can get away with anything but morals in football are low and have been for quite some time. He'll win us this league in the final 2 games. He'll then go on to rip new rizholes in the summer for England too. He is relentless.

I don't know anyone that doesn't like Vardy. All my mates that support other teams all love him. I'm sure there will be people that don't like him but I think most will admire what he has achieved in a short space of time

[jayfox26]

Just look at the way the ref holds up the card. I really would love to know what words were exchanged both ways. I love the way players reactions are always pulled into question. But what about the refs arrogance and demeanor. That in itself can be something that creates a reaction. Maybe he should be fined for his actions too.

Apparently he's a head teacher and it seems he treats the players like school children! He's a proper bell end

[whetstonefox]

In my mind he's going to get an extra game ban, if they do more than that it would be shocking , but this is the FA!

[DJ Barry Hammond]

We all know from the footage that Vardy aggresively jabbed at Moss and the theories are that he said "You're a fvcking cvnt!". 

 

Regardless of anything else - yellow or not, dive or not, decision give one way or not - surely if a player does that to the ref it'd be a straight red anyhow. So the question is, what would a ban be for that anyhow? It's 3 matches for violent conduct right? What would it be such extreme dissent? Just one?

http://www.thefa.com/~/media/files/thefaportal/governance-docs/discipline-cases/2015%20-%20part%203/the-fa-v-richard-walton---11-november-2015.ashx

This is the closest similar case I've come across reading the FA's reports - you can search them here: http://www.thefa.com/football-rules-governance/more/written-reasons

True it's a Lincoln under 19 match, but it has the swearing following a sending off. I'd be amazed if the decision is anything different from an additional 1 match ban.

[Guest Mee-9]

Surely as the nature of the refereeing for both teams was shambolic, along with the criticism Moss has faced so far, this will count in Vardys favour?

I reckon he'll just get a slap on the wrist, (the one without the cast) well I hope!

[Julian Joachim Jr Shabadoo]

I reckon he'll just get a slap on the wrist, (the one without the cast)

 

 

lol

[MC Prussian]

Costa didn't swear though, Vardy did we're told... different things. 

Costa's regular behaviour on the pitch is usually pretty much offensive, though.

[foxy boxing]

woy supporting vardy, he knows he needs a vardy that is firing on all cylanders at the euros hopefully the fa will listen to woy

[st albans fox]

Surely it has nothing to do with the standard of refereeing

It's to do with the abuse directed at the official and the finger pointing. The FA are never going to allow that to pass. IF JV had a spotless record then he could get away with a slapped wrist and fine but given that he has served suspensions before I just can't see how they won't give him that extra game. Mind you, the inconsistency of it would fit with the performance of their match official on Sunday!

[Gerard]

ame="Vader" post="3838464" timestamp="1461223345"]

No youre not, hes about 15 feet away. If you look at the photo vardy and moss appear the same height but vardy is about 6" taller than moss. The other thing is when vardy falls he has to fall away from his broken wrist so hes hands dont come down first.

 

That's a brilliant point whether it be true or not and just casts further doubt over the situation.

 

I fear though it's all irrelevant, he's had his red card but it's the dissent afterwards that is the issue here and no matter how much Vardy felt aggrieved with both yellows the FA will feel obliged to give him an extra match ban.

 

Hope I'm wrong because I believe he should never even have been cautioned in that match let alone twice and sent off.

[Bluearmyfox28]

I think he will plead guilty, usually helps the players cause when it comes to charging the player.

Quite often if the player asks for a hearing as he doesn't think he's guilty but then does get found guilty the charge seems to be more harsh.

[Captain...]

Surely it has nothing to do with the standard of refereeing

It's to do with the abuse directed at the official and the finger pointing. The FA are never going to allow that to pass. IF JV had a spotless record then he could get away with a slapped wrist and fine but given that he has served suspensions before I just can't see how they won't give him that extra game. Mind you, the inconsistency of it would fit with the performance of their match official on Sunday!

 

But if you feel that you have been on the receiving end of a number of bad decisions, and they can show that it was a bad decision for the first yellow and a bad decision for the second, not to mention being headlocked to the ground early in the first half and nothing given. I also thought he was harshly penalised for fouls in the first half when they were just tackles.

 

It doesn't excuse foul and abusive language but it does explain it.

[Ricey]

Surely as the nature of the refereeing for both teams was shambolic, along with the criticism Moss has faced so far, this will count in Vardys favour?

I reckon he'll just get a slap on the wrist, (the one without the cast) well I hope!

 

Gabriel was given a one match ban for dissent, even though his red card was overturned beforehand. The only thing they'll take into account is what happened after the red card.

[Carl the Llama]

Surely it has nothing to do with the standard of refereeing

It's to do with the abuse directed at the official and the finger pointing. The FA are never going to allow that to pass. IF JV had a spotless record then he could get away with a slapped wrist and fine but given that he has served suspensions before I just can't see how they won't give him that extra game. Mind you, the inconsistency of it would fit with the performance of their match official on Sunday!

Personally I'm much more offended by players crowding around the ref waving invisible cards and some such rather than a player having an angry reaction to an unfair decision then immediately storming off. FA should focus on stamping that out and getting competent refs in first...

[stripeyfox]

I wonder if Vardy apologised after the event, either in person or in writing. I can remember an FA disciplinary hearing a few years ago (admittedly only at County level), in which the player's verbal AND written apologies in which he was genuinely sorry for his outburst was taken into account. In fact I remember being surprised at the time that the panel only applied the "standard" fine and suspension (for the offence) rather than giving an extra ban.

If Vardy had any sense, he would have been in the ref's room once he'd cooled down and offered an apology for his conduct (regardless of whether he felt cheated or not)

[Babylon]

I can't see anything other than an extended ban. There is precedent for starters, and we have to enter a plea today. If we please not guilty, would that end up in an even longer ban if found guilty? If we please guilty we're admitting it and I doubt how hard you argue your case, you've admitted guilt and the rule book is clear.

[Babylon]

I'd imagine the club are looking into the appeal process. If you don't accept the decision, plead not guilty and submit an appeal... could that potentially stretch the ban beyond the end of the season? We're what, 25 days away from the last game, could you drag it into next season and face a longer ban then?

[stripeyfox]

I can't see anything other than an extended ban. There is precedent for starters, and we have to enter a plea today. If we please not guilty, would that end up in an even longer ban if found guilty? If we please guilty we're admitting it and I doubt how hard you argue your case, you've admitted guilt and the rule book is clear.

Basically, if the panel find him guilty based on the referee report then it as one match ban (in addition to the one game for the red card). If he appeals, and is found guilty then it is two extra matches.

I can't see anything other than an extra one game ban here. There is no way that an FA panel of old farts is going to read a report that a player called the ref an effing cnut and not apply the extra game ban.

[filbertway]

Oh man, watching it back, none of that seems half as bad as I remembered or it seemed on Sunday.

[DJ Barry Hammond]

I'd imagine the club are looking into the appeal process. If you don't accept the decision, plead not guilty and submit an appeal... could that potentially stretch the ban beyond the end of the season? We're what, 25 days away from the last game, could you drag it into next season and face a longer ban then?

My bet... Accept the charge, but appeal the level of punishment due to extenuating circumstances. IF we were very, very lucky, the panel might impose a suspended 1 match ban (for 12 months) dependent on future conduct, but that would be an astonishing decision given the presicents that have gone before.

[ramboacdc]

Scenes when his ban stays at one match because of Hodgson

if it does i will forever back this england manager that i have previously had no faith in!