Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
promised land

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

By promised land, in Leicester City Forum

Recommended Posts

stripeyfox

stripeyfox

Posted
Posted

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?

from what I understand an appeal against the ban can be lodged but in order for the appeal to even be considered it has to show that at least one of the following happened at the original hearing:

•Failed to give the appellant a fair hearing;

•Failed to comply with the Disciplinary Procedures relevant to the hearing of the charge;

•Came to a decision on the facts of the case which no reasonable body could have reached; and/or

•Imposed an award, order or other sanction that is excessive or disproportionate.

It is hard to see how if they give Vardy an extra game ban based on his conduct that any of these could apply, and therefore the appeal would be instantly rejected.

More info at:

https://www.unlockthelaw.co.uk/efa-disciplinary-rules.html

It looks like the appeals process is set up exactly to prevent the sort of "stalling" that may go on - as in to defer a potential punishment until a more "convenient" time.

Guest Lcfc82

Guest Lcfc82

Posted
Posted

Danny mills has come out and criticised woy for backing vardy.

Could mills make it anymore obvious he hates us

Larry_LCFC

Larry_LCFC

Posted
Posted

Are there not grounds for appeal on the ref actually being a ****ing **** and Vardy was just stating a fact? I should be a lawyer.

Larry_LCFC

Larry_LCFC

Posted
Posted

Danny mills has come out and criticised woy for backing vardy.

Could mills make it anymore obvious he hates us

Hodgson criticises the ref, Mills criticises Hodgson, we criticise Mills lol It just goes on and on.
filbertway

filbertway

Posted
Posted

I think that's mainly because the replays cut out a lot of what was happening live?

 

Yeah possibly, in my mind he was laying in to moss for about a minute haha.

KFS

KFS

Posted
Posted

Can I just state that my spell checker keeps altering "plea" to please. I'm not utterly mental.

Oh plea

Captain...

Captain...

Posted
Posted

Unless we can prove Vardy didn't swear at Moss, which I doubt, I hope we have already accepted guilt and apologised and are focussing on leniency, he felt aggrieved by the decisions that had gone against him, he didn't argue with Moss, he left the field quickly it was just one outburst in the heat of the moment, one he regrets and has apologised for.

Ricey

Ricey

Posted
Posted

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)

 

Not that it means a lot, but his car was gone when I left the stadium after the match, so he could have left whilst the match was still on-going.

Tuna

Tuna

Posted
Posted

We give lots of pundits - basically the ex pros - plenty of stick on here and rightfully so, but at least the likes of Lawro and Crooks can be laughed at like the caricatures they are.

Mills I reserve special contempt for.

He's a smug, arrogant, dismissive, demeaning toad of a pundit with nil charisma and the personality of a piece of lego and a generally unpleasant man.

He championed the inclusion of b teams in the football league and didn't get why this apalling suggestion was met with outrage. This tells you all you need to know about his quality as a pundit.

Guest Foxin_mad

Guest Foxin_mad

Posted
Posted

Who the **** is Danny Mills??! Who cares what his opinion is??

Benji

Benji

Posted
Posted

We give lots of pundits - basically the ex pros - plenty of stick on here and rightfully so, but at least the likes of Lawro and Crooks can be laughed at like the caricatures they are.

Mills I reserve special contempt for.

He's a smug, arrogant, dismissive, demeaning toad of a pundit with nil charisma and the personality of a piece of lego and a generally unpleasant man.

He championed the inclusion of b teams in the football league and didn't get why this apalling suggestion was met with outrage. This tells you all you need to know about his quality as a pundit.

I watched Norwich v Sunderland and at 2-0 he said "I don't understand why the manager doesn't just go for it, who cares how many they conceed might as well lose by trying to get back into it".

Hmm, ever heard of goal difference, Danny?

10 minutes later it's 3-0 and all of a sudden "Norwich really should be more careful, this goal difference could be crucial come the end of the season".

He's a muppet who talks sh1te for the sake of being controversial and against the grain. Never has a good word to say during a match and leaves you to believe he must have been the perfect defender.

easilee

easilee

Posted
Posted

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.

They'll just say he shouldn't be playing with a fractured wrist.

inckley fox

inckley fox

Posted
Posted

I don't think the referee's performance in that or his next match will make any difference to this whatsoever. I can't see the FA's decision resting on whether they thought the comments from Vardy were justified or not.

 

You don't think the FA panels respond to pressure from the media, clubs or managers? I thought they had a shocking history of being persuaded by the likes of Ferguson, Wenger, the London-based press etc. And if Moss is slated for his performance tonight - which is perfectly conceivable, because even minor question marks will be exploded into mountainous ones - there will be an extraordinary wave of feeling that Moss's credibility is in tatters.

 

The credibility of his report, to a large degree, depends on his credibility.

 

If you have multiple managers, sets of fans, newspapers and players, from several different clubs and beyond, firmly in agreement that a single official is damaging for the game then the FA may well see the warning signs here. They will see that - while they were busy hand-picking refs for Spurs - their appointment of Moss for the Leicester game, and their keenness to respond to his report, may end up being seen as the deciding factor in the title race.

 

If the FA are looking for a way out of 2-3 match ban now, whether Hodgson's comments are the cause or a consequence of that, widespread confirmation that the referee at the centre of it all is thoroughly incompetent would be the tipping factor. Of course, he could have a great game, could be praised by both managers, and that equally may count against us - if pressure counts for anything.

 

And I'm inclined to go along with your notion that 'whether they agree with Vardy's comments or not' shouldn't have a bearing on the decision. Didn't they acknowledge that Costa shouldn't have received his first booking but still extend his ban?

 

But the interesting factor here is their number one employee justifying Vardy's reaction to the red by pointing towards the unfairness of the red. In other words, 'if you treat people irrationally, don't expect them to respond rationally'. It's that connection between unfairness and obscenity by a high-ranking FA employee which is interesting, and if there's further evidence of people reacting unwisely to unfairness from that same referee tonight, I fully expect the case to be reassessed.

stripeyfox

stripeyfox

Posted
Posted

You don't think the FA panels respond to pressure from the media, clubs or managers? I thought they had a shocking history of being persuaded by the likes of Ferguson, Wenger, the London-based press etc. And if Moss is slated for his performance tonight - which is perfectly conceivable, because even minor question marks will be exploded into mountainous ones - there will be an extraordinary wave of feeling that Moss's credibility is in tatters.

The credibility of his report, to a large degree, depends on his credibility.

If you have multiple managers, sets of fans, newspapers and players, from several different clubs and beyond, firmly in agreement that a single official is damaging for the game then the FA may well see the warning signs here. They will see that - while they were busy hand-picking refs for Spurs - their appointment of Moss for the Leicester game, and their keenness to respond to his report, may end up being seen as the deciding factor in the title race.

If the FA are looking for a way out of 2-3 match ban now, whether Hodgson's comments are the cause or a consequence of that, widespread confirmation that the referee at the centre of it all is thoroughly incompetent would be the tipping factor. Of course, he could have a great game, could be praised by both managers, and that equally may count against us - if pressure counts for anything.

And I'm inclined to go along with your notion that 'whether they agree with Vardy's comments or not' shouldn't have a bearing on the decision. Didn't they acknowledge that Costa shouldn't have received his first booking but still extend his ban?

But the interesting factor here is their number one employee justifying Vardy's reaction to the red by pointing towards the unfairness of the red. In other words, 'if you treat people irrationally, don't expect them to respond rationally'. It's that connection between unfairness and obscenity by a high-ranking FA employee which is interesting, and if there's further evidence of people reacting unwisely to unfairness from that same referee tonight, I fully expect the case to be reassessed.

I see where you are coming from but in the unlikely event that they do not extend the ban because the ref had a bad game, they are effectively condoning the behaviour - is it ok to call the ref a cnut if he is having a crap game?

shen

shen

Posted
Posted

I see where you are coming from but in the unlikely event that they do not extend the ban because the ref had a bad game, they are effectively condoning the behaviour - is it ok to call the ref a cnut if he is having a crap game?

 

Well, it requires the ref to use some common sense. When Vardy is calling him a cnut (in itself hardly a terribly insulting word, is it? He's basically saying "I disagree with you" in a vulgar manner) it is merely expressing frustration in a high-stakes game.

When looked at in the context of events, as Hodgson points out, it would be the norm that people react angrily to a perceived injustice.

 

Also, does this mean that players can report eachother for swearing? They already do when it comes to racist remarks, but if the refs (and fans, in Pearson's case last season) are protected species, surely players should be too?

Larry_LCFC

Larry_LCFC

Posted
Posted

What annoys me the most is you see players telling the ref to **** off every match when he blows up for a foul that they disagree with it. Not sure why all these new precedents are being set against us suddenly.

st albans fox

st albans fox

Posted
Posted

What annoys me the most is you see players telling the ref to **** off every match when he blows up for a foul that they disagree with it. Not sure why all these new precedents are being set against us suddenly.

 

Its the finger what done it larry

mancfox

mancfox

Posted
Posted

I hear that the head of the FA panel is a Spurs fan!

Well for impartiality, as with the Kevin Friend situation, I hope we can demand certain panel members are removed if they support Spurs or live in North London.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...