Famara 6 Game Ban (Merged)

[BobBobSuperBob]

4 minutes ago, Olé said:

But presumably no actual recorded evidence of the "racism". So similar to the spitting accusation - a very serious one made in a written statement by players.

Let's see what they do on the basis of a statement and whether a Mansfield players statement has the same impact as a Birmingham City players statement.

Ahh sorry mate didn’t realise the above 

I assume the independent potential witnesses (Officials can’t provide evidence) so I’d assume that’s the case (You are correct)

Seeing the immediate and level of reactions and fracas that followed something certainly ‘went on’ and my hunch says it’s probably a true allegation

[JamesBCFC]

2 minutes ago, CyderInACan said:

Not a rant, there just seems to be a lot of people confusing evidence with truth. I could quite easily make a statement saying that City play in blue and that our goalie is Gordon Banks. That would be my evidence. Whether it’s truthful or correct is for others to decide, of course. Some don’t seem to understand the distinction. 

Wouldn't what you say "City play in blue, Banks as the GK" be a claim?

Evidence then would be either someone corroborating that claim, or an image of the yellow and blue away kit from a couple of seasons ago (there you could point at the blue)?

[BobBobSuperBob]

4 minutes ago, CyderInACan said:

Not a rant, there just seems to be a lot of people confusing evidence with truth. I could quite easily make a statement saying that City play in blue and that our goalie is Gordon Banks. That would be my evidence. Whether it’s truthful or correct is for others to decide, of course. Some don’t seem to understand the distinction. 

No I agree with you mate

Its something that’s highly relevant to all cases

In a criminal trial accepted facts are things like ‘The 24th February was a Saturday’ and few in number and only things that are

a) agreed or

b) absolutely irrefutable

[jimmyb]

11 minutes ago, BobBobSuperBob said:

But ITS NOT A CRIMINAL COURT

AGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

 

Ill say it again

ALL COURTS and tribunals , etc etc outside the Criminal Courts don’t work on that proof threshold

Thats the ‘real world’ whether you (Or I or anyone else)  like it or not

 

Out of interest

Would  you like every tribunal or court hearing to have the same burden of proof as of  a criminal court ?

 

 

 

I know it isn’t, I didn’t say it was, nor did I indicate I thought the standard should be.

In fact I didn’t mention any standard of proof at all. That wasn’t really the thrust of the post.

Take the time to read it properly.

 

[BobBobSuperBob]

1 minute ago, JamesBCFC said:

Wouldn't what you say "City play in blue, Banks as the GK" be a claim?

Evidence then would be either someone corroborating that claim, or an image of the yellow and blue away kit from a couple of seasons ago (there you could point at the blue)?

This is turnin* into a legal debate ha ha

But no 

Cyder makinga written statement or giving oral account / claim that we layin Blue and White and Gordon Banks plays in goal (Its a far fetched example) IS in fact evidence to be considered by the Court UNLESS the third party can provide evidence that renders Cyders evidence as unreliable and something that should be disregarded (Its a bad example because that would be easy to do in the Blue and White Banks claims)

[BobBobSuperBob]

7 minutes ago, jimmyb said:

I know it isn’t, I didn’t say it was, nor did I indicate I thought the standard should be.

In fact I didn’t mention any standard of proof at all. That wasn’t really the thrust of the post.

Take the time to read it properly.

 

So what is  your point

because it’s not the or your ‘real world’ whether you claim it to be or not because it’s not a criminal matter which is something you are using to argue your point 

You are comparing something entirely different, apples and pears

Not sure it’s ME that needs to read thanks (Or understand facts)

as for your above post telling me to read and and disassociation with speaking about standard of proof

In the real world this wouldn’t get as far as a criminal court though would it. No way the CPS would prosecute on the strength of this only. No physical or independent evidence to back up the claim. Just a bloke and his mate.

What’s that then

 

[Mr Popodopolous]

36 minutes ago, BobBobSuperBob said:

I’d like to know if either player complained to the referee at the time

Im (assuming)  from what’s been said that they didn’t 

That for me , if so is the telling single fact

Agreed.

Additionally, in another post you mention how different Court hearings are to tribunals, hearings, FA hearings etc.

Surely in a case like this however with:

*(Seemingly) no independent witnesses.

*The potential- probable?- lag in reporting time after the event.

*The fact there was no mass brawl- as spitting at an opponent one of the most heinous crimes that can be committed on a football pitch, so surprised at the lack of reaction at the time.

*Literally Player A v Player B plus Player B's mate.

*Numerous cameras at football these days, camera angles. None picked it up.

I'm not arguing about whether it happened (I have severe doubts) but surely even on balance of probability there would be a strong case for a verdict of case not proven or inconclusive? Therefore no ban.

[jimmyb]

2 minutes ago, BobBobSuperBob said:

So what is  your point

because it’s not the or your ‘real world’ whether you claim it to be or not because it’s not a criminal matter which is something you are using to argue your point 

You are comparing something entirely different

Not sure it’s ME that needs to read thanks (Or understand facts)

 

In your previous post you had mentioned about doing well to convict on similar evidence. Mine was a passing comment,not an argument and essentially agreeing actually, that in reality it wouldn’t even reach a court.

As I said though it wasn’t really the thrust of the post, the points underneath it were the points I was actually making. I wasn’t making any point at all about standards of proof, in either the criminal or civil systems.

Shall we leave it there, I’ve got a cuppa on the brew.

[BobBobSuperBob]

8 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Agreed.

Additionally, in another post you mention how different Court hearings are to tribunals, hearings, FA hearings etc.

Surely in a case like this however with:

*(Seemingly) no independent witnesses.

*The potential- probable?- lag in reporting time after the event.

*The fact there was no mass brawl- as spitting at an opponent one of the most heinous crimes that can be committed on a football pitch, so surprised at the lack of reaction at the time.

*Literally Player A v Player B plus Player B's mate.

*Numerous cameras at football these days, camera angles.

I'm not arguing about whether it happened (I have severe doubts) but surely even on balance of probability it would and perhaps should have a verdict of case not proven or inconclusive? Therefore no ban.

Now (For me) Mr P you are hitting to the heart of this and this a good post 

All of the above would form part of my considerations if I was on such a panel (Re cameras LJ did say the footage was ‘inconclusive’ )

Ultimately it will have come down to ‘Do they believe Davis and Deans’ as simple as that 

 

[BobBobSuperBob]

3 minutes ago, jimmyb said:

In your previous post you had mentioned about doing well to convict on similar evidence. Mine was a passing comment,not an argument and essentially agreeing actually, that in reality it wouldn’t even reach a court.

As I said though it wasn’t really the thrust of the post, the points underneath it were the points I was actually making. I wasn’t making any point at all about standards of proof, in either the criminal or civil systems.

Shall we leave it there, I’ve got a cuppa on the brew.

You (Inadvertently) raise an interesting point

It appears the matter was never reported to the Police which it rarely is

Im not sure with football but a lot of employers have or certainly had a double jeapordy rule where if you are found not guilty by a Criminal Court you then can’t be disciplined for the same matters as a fall back

If that is the case then Famara would have stood a far healthier chance (IMHO)  if a criminal complaint of assault HAD been made

[jimmyb]

8 minutes ago, BobBobSuperBob said:

You (Inadvertently) raise an interesting point

It appears the matter was never reported to the Police which it rarely is

Im not sure with football but a lot of employers have or certainly had a double jeapordy rule where if you are found not guilty by a Criminal Court you then can’t be disciplined for the same matters as a fall back

If that is the case then Famara would have stood a far healthier chance (IMHO)  if a criminal complaint of assault HAD been made

Over the years I’ve found some of my best work has been done inadvertently. 

I think we’ve established he would’ve been ok if this had proceeded on a criminal footing.

Its a mildly interesting point though. Didn’t John Terry get cleared by the Met but then done by the FA over the Ferdinand incident.

Only player I remember being convicted for on pitch offence is Duncan Ferguson, albeit under Scottish law that I will concede is not a specialism of mine.

[BobBobSuperBob]

1 minute ago, jimmyb said:

Over the years I’ve found some of my best work has been done inadvertently. 

I think we’ve established he would’ve been ok if this had proceeded on a criminal footing.

Its a mildly interesting point though. Didn’t John Terry get cleared by the Met but then done by the FA over the Ferdinand incident.

Cant remember if it reached court ? In some organisations with the double jeaporady rule / policy you need to be cleared by a Court , an investigation not resulting in no prosecution isn’t necessarily helpful as daft as it sounds

Only player I remember being convicted for on pitch offence is Duncan Ferguson, albeit under Scottish law that I will concede is not a specialism of mine.

Good point - I know he went to prison - did he have a ban as well - think he May have  

 

[jimmyb]

16 minutes ago, BobBobSuperBob said:

 

Just checked and Terry did go to court. Cleared in the Mags of any criminal offence.

As Ferguson was undoubtedly red carded I assume he would have served an immediate ban prior to any prosecution. Whether he received anything further I don’t know. 

Wouldve been a brave panel to tell Big Dunc he was getting some extra games in the stands. 

[BobBobSuperBob]

1 minute ago, jimmyb said:

Just checked and Terry did go to court. Cleared in the Mags of any criminal offence.

As Ferguson was undoubtedly red carded I assume he would have served an immediate ban prior to any prosecution. Whether he received anything further I don’t know. 

Wouldve been a brave panel to tell Big Dunc he was getting some extra games in the stands. 

Thanks

I suddenly couldn’t remember if Terry was charged / banned by FA despite being found Not Guilty at Court !!! 

Had to look it up !

Charged by FA 2 weeks after court case

‘Banned for four matches and given a £220,000 fine for using insulting words which included a reference to Anton Ferdinand's colour or race following an FA independent regulatory commission hearing.’

 

Personally I don’t agree with that - two bites at the same cherry 

Clearly the FA don’t believe in the ‘Double jeopardy principle’ !!! 

[luke_bristol]

They would simply use the catch all “bringing the game into disrepute” charge I expect 

[Mr Popodopolous]

2 hours ago, BobBobSuperBob said:

Now (For me) Mr P you are hitting to the heart of this and this a good post 

All of the above would form part of my considerations if I was on such a panel (Re cameras LJ did say the footage was ‘inconclusive’ )

Ultimately it will have come down to ‘Do they believe Davis and Deans’ as simple as that 

 

Thanks Bob- cases like this always interest me.

Would likewise form part of my consideration too on such a panel . Inconclusive footage? Thanks for that clarification.

Yeah, definitely sounds that way. The FA if a club has the inclination to go to CAS for me though are opening a massive can of worms- as well as the ever present chance of setting a precedent. Genuinely think the CAS might rule (if they have the authority, if it's within their jurisdiction) that such cases like this would need to be case not proven or inconclusive.

[BobBobSuperBob]

6 hours ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Thanks Bob- cases like this always interest me.

Would likewise form part of my consideration too on such a panel . Inconclusive footage? Thanks for that clarification.

Yeah, definitely sounds that way. The FA if a club has the inclination to go to CAS for me though are opening a massive can of worms- as well as the ever present chance of setting a precedent. Genuinely think the CAS might rule (if they have the authority, if it's within their jurisdiction) that such cases like this would need to be case not proven or inconclusive.

Not sure how the Court Of Arbitration Works But to conduct a successful appeal to The Criminal Courts Of Appeal you need to show that (And I’ll stick to straightforward rather than full legal explanations)

Either correct process has not been followed 

or

The Original decision of the Court (Panel) involved was clearly flawed / wrong

(ie You can’t just appeal merely on the basis you ‘don’t like’ the decision of the Court / Jury )

 

Assuming it follows a similar guide / principles I would surmise we would need new / additional significant evidence to have any chance of effecting the original decision

In theory a challenge regarding the punishment may have more success but previous punishments indicate we would We wasting our breath with spitting receiving 6 game ban (ie Not regarded as unduly harsh)

its a difficult and interesting case , but sadly one that could really effect our season and Tbf , if he’s innocent, completely unjustly, Famaras  reputation

Either Famara Or Davis And Deans arecompletely lying Or there is a total misinterpretation here (For example was Famara shouting / screaming in Davis’s face angrily (Am I right in recalling that Famara was regularly getting buffeted and fouled that night ?) and in doing so spittle has gone towards or even in Davis’s face (I’m merely trying to think of what might have happened other than Famara is guilty as sin and lying (Certainly LJ clearly knows him and believes him) or for some reason Davis and Deans have conspired to completely stitch  him up , (which would be strange , and a real new low for footballers)

[Tully Bascomb]

9 hours ago, CyderInACan said:

Not a rant, there just seems to be a lot of people confusing evidence with truth. I could quite easily make a statement saying that City play in blue and that our goalie is Gordon Banks. That would be my evidence. Whether it’s truthful or correct is for others to decide, of course. Some don’t seem to understand the distinction. 

Thank goodness the keeper situation has been sorted

[JoeAman08]

Surely Birmingham should have to come up with the video evidence to follow this through? You said he spat at you, show us. 

[CyderInACan]

1 hour ago, BoneyardTIM said:

Thank goodness the keeper situation has been sorted

It’s obviously having a subconscious impact on me!

[Super]

13 hours ago, hodge said:

Bailey Wright would have been banned for 3 games instead 

Not sure why people keep going on about this one. 

[bristolcitysweden]

If someone claim I knocked him down in the street and there is a witness and I say no I did not I trust I would be sent to prison. Besides, a fellow poster on here noticed Diedhiou spit in the face and was surprised no one else noticed. He got what he deserved.   

[bristolcitysweden]

Why don't apology for what you did instead of lying? 

[bristolcitysweden]

Probably because you would get a pay cut. Your family would be proud of you though.

[bristolcitysweden]

We all make mistakes but we are not all lying

[swanker]

On 22/05/2018 at 09:40, Clarky89 said:

If true, get rid. 

No place for that at our club. 

Ain’t true according to Johnson. 

[Davefevs]

On 30/07/2018 at 17:19, wood_red said:

Wow - seems unbelievable to me after reading "During that altercation it was alleged that the Appellant spat in the face of Mr Davis".

Yet no reaction from the player who has been spat at directly in the face at the time?? That would have created a mass brawl.

There was a reaction after the altercation between Davis and Diedhiou from Dean though, who chased Diedhiou half way across the pitch, grappling with him, before (I think) pushing Diedhiou over.

I am in no doubt that something happened, but no idea whether it was a spit or not.  I think the excess sweat possibility is pretty lame and I think was a poorly thought through reason.  You know if you’ve been spat at, whether that’s a genuine gob, or spit (spittle) from being shouted at in the face.  You know the difference between spit, spittle and sweat.

City should’ve focussed on the spittle and challenged more the statements from Davis and Dean on that basis.

City took a long time to get their plan if attack wrong imho.

[BobBobSuperBob]

4 hours ago, Davefevs said:

There was a reaction after the altercation between Davis and Diedhiou from Dean though, who chased Diedhiou half way across the pitch, grappling with him, before (I think) pushing Diedhiou over.

I am in no doubt that something happened, but no idea whether it was a spit or not.  I think the excess sweat possibility is pretty lame and I think was a poorly thought through reason.  You know if you’ve been spat at, whether that’s a genuine gob, or spit (spittle) from being shouted at in the face.  You know the difference between spit, spittle and sweat.

City should’ve focussed on the spittle and challenged more the statements from Davis and Dean on that basis.

City took a long time to get their plan if attack wrong imho.

Thanks Dave - You alerted me to the written summary of the appeal which I hadn’t seen

You are spot on with your comments and it sounds like we treated the original allegation flippantly and writing it off As didn’t happen and /. Or it was accidental 

If you read the document you have to say you can see why , with a weak unsupported explanation in defence why they found FD guilty

We then appeal yet fail to submit the grounds / new explanation or any evidence to support it 24 hrs before the appeal against the requirements regarding submissions (Not great or convincing)

The panel still allowed the submissions which were now a third explanation of what happened 

This for me was the weakest explanation of the three attempts at excuse / explanation - excess sweat mistaken for spit

Some interesting points revealed that the video although unable to decipher whether FD did spit shows Davis’s Head going back for some reason 

It also clarified that either Dean or Davis immediately alerted or complained to the Assistant referee

It won’t go down well in here but I Think almost anyone understanding evidence and procedure , reading that document will understand why he was found guilty and why the appeal was dismissed

Our approach to the whole matter was IMHO casual , poor and tbh .....tinpot - I have done far more preparation , and far more professional , when clearing myself at County FA hearings for red cards / reported as a manager

Only got ourselves to blame to a very large degree

 

 

[Davefevs]

agree Bob.

[View from the Dolman]

For anyone who's interested, the FA have now published the written reasons of the initial commission: 

http://www.thefa.com/-/media/files/thefaportal/governance-docs/discipline-cases/2018/the-fa-v-famara-diedhiou---17-may-2018.ashx