FA Disciplinary Policy - Right of Appeal

At the start of the current season, the Football Association introduced a new discipline policy for adult football and you are invited to provide feedback on the aspect which concerns the right of appeal.

Under this new policy, a player may only appeal to deny a ‘standard’** sending off offence if there is video evidence which clearly shows that the referee “has made a serious and obvious error in law”. There would be no appeal and the decision would be based on the video alone. Video evidence cannot be used in the case of a sending off for unacceptable language.

The reasons given for this change in policy are:

1. To increase the respect shown towards referees
2. To give clarity on when a match based suspension starts in that it will now always start 21 days after the game in question.
3. To remove the possibility of inconsistency which may be shown by a Commission at a Personal Hearing.

Are you in agreement with this aspect of the policy?

Your feedback is important. Please cast a vote and feel free to post your feedback.
____________________________________________________________

** A ‘standard’ sending off offence is defined as
- serious foul play,
- violent conduct
- spitting at an opponent
- using offensive, insulting or abusive language
- denying an obvious goal scoring opportunity
- receiving a second caution

Examples of non-standard offences for which there is a right of appeal, are common or more serious assaults and racially aggravated offences

hadnt seen this when i posted on the other poll, but it doesnt give more respect to referees, i think you have more respect if there can be an admittence of a mistake. At the moment, there is more of an 'us and them' attitude because players know that even if a ref makes a poor decision the club gets 'stuffed'.

also, would we be allowed to video a game in a public park, especially if there was a kids game on the adjacent pitches?

Don't think there are that many kids games going on at the same time - I would be more worried about the language they would hear!

How many teams appealed before the changes and what was the success rate?

Can't see how it makes much difference, except saving time and costs both of clubs and the FA, dealing with frivolous appeals - most of them on the list are going to be hard to prove either way without evidence anyway.

With respect to ref's I don't think this affects it either way.

Fishandchips wrote:

How many teams appealed before the changes and what was the success rate?

With respect to ref's I don't think this affects it either way.

Over many seasons the success rate for all appeals has been almost exactly 50% in spite of what many may think.

You can video in public, as long as the people you are pointing the camera at have agreed to it, as for the kids hearing bad language, a child would never go to see a live football game again, if the parents were that stuffy, take em to a polo game instead.