Fryatt's appeal - unsuccessful

[bocadillo]

A 'wrongful dismissal' claim has been lodged with the FA in regard to Matty's sending-off for violent conduct on Saturday.

An FA Regulatory Commission will hear the claim tomorrow (Tuesday 27 November).

This means that the player is free to play in tonight's game against Cardiff City.

 

[Steven]

Re: Matty Fryatt's appeal

A 'wrongful dismissal' claim has been lodged with the FA in regard to Matty's sending-off for violent conduct on Saturday.

An FA Regulatory Commission will hear the claim tomorrow (Tuesday 27 November).

This means that the player is free to play in tonight's game against Cardiff City.

Wrongful dismissal.

 

[bocadillo]

Re: Matty Fryatt's appeal

Wrongful dismissal.

It's difficult to see what Matty's case might be.

 

[fitz]

Re: Matty Fryatt's appeal

It's difficult to see what Matty's case might be.

holloway has just been on sky (probably recorded much earlier) saying one striker is suspended "supposedly"

 

[Nottingham Fox]

Re: Matty Fryatt's appeal

The view that Sky have just shown from behind IMO clearly shows there was no elbow. The ball hit the player in the face.

 

[Steven]

Re: Matty Fryatt's appeal

The view that Sky have just shown from behind IMO clearly shows there was no elbow. The ball hit the player in the face.

Didn't see that on the Championship. :icon_conf

 

[beaumontfox]

Re: Matty Fryatt's appeal

No we didn't. Stupid programme.

 

[jonahal32]

fryatt out

http://www.lcfc.premiumtv.co.uk/page/LatestNews/0,,10274~1177380,00.html misses the next 3 games

 

[Nottingham Fox]

Re: fryatt out

http://www.lcfc.premiumtv.co.uk/page/LatestNews/0,,10274~1177380,00.html misses the next 3 games

An absolutely awful decision.

The view that most have seen, I admit did Fryatt no favours, but the angle that Sky had last night from behind the incident clearly showed the ball hitting the player in the face, and Fryatt merely catching the player in the chest area, and this only being because the player was tugging at Fryatts shirt, making his balance become unsteady.

I hope whoever made this decision gets a dose of crabs

 

[newtonfox]

Re: fryatt out

An absolutely awful decision.

The view that most have seen, I admit did Fryatt no favours, but the angle that Sky had last night from behind the incident clearly showed the ball hitting the player in the face, and Fryatt merely catching the player in the chest area, and this only being because the player was tugging at Fryatts shirt, making his balance become unsteady.

I hope whoever made this decision gets a dose of crabs

Agreed ,its high time we had video play back at footy match's

 

[jonahal32]

at the game it looked very much like the ball had hit him in the face, but when i saw it on the championship it looked for all the world like fryatt had elbowed him and i agreed with the ref decison. havnt seen the sky footage but if it shows that fryatt is innocent then i.t.v and the f.a need a poke in the eye with a big stick

 

[Melton Fox]

Re: fryatt out

Agreed ,its high time we had video play back at footy match's

It's also about time that an appeal is seen as a gamble, and not as a formality.

I would like to see a punishment for all failed appeals.

 

[homer]

Re: fryatt out

Agreed ,its high time we had video play back at footy match's

As I presume that the appeal decision would have been made after looking at video replays of the incident (from all angles), I don't quite see how this would have helped

 

[bocadillo]

Re: fryatt out

An absolutely awful decision.

The view that most have seen, I admit did Fryatt no favours, but the angle that Sky had last night from behind the incident clearly showed the ball hitting the player in the face, and Fryatt merely catching the player in the chest area, and this only being because the player was tugging at Fryatts shirt, making his balance become unsteady.

I hope whoever made this decision gets a dose of crabs

You really have got your knickers in a twist over this one. The Commission will have had all the angles available to them and will have looked at it from all the angles.

There was no need at all for Fryatt's elbow to be where it was - it matters very little on which part of the opponent's body it made contact. There are lessons to be leant from this - let's hope that Fryatt is bright enough to do so.

 

[jonahal32]

Re: fryatt out

You really have got your knickers in a twist over this one. The Commission will have had all the angles available to them and will have looked at it from all the angles.

There was no need at all for Fryatt's elbow to be where it was - it matters very little on which part of the opponent's body it made contact. There are lessons to be leant from this - let's hope that Fryatt is bright enough to do so.

he plays football, therefore the words bright and hope do not apply

 

[bocadillo]

Re: fryatt out

Agreed ,its high time we had video play back at footy match's

What relevance has that got to this case? The referee decided, without the benefit of play-back, that it was a sending-off offence. The Commission, with the benefit of play-back, decided ot was a sending-off offence.

By far the greater number of City fans who have expressed an opinion agree with the referee - and therefore with the Commission.

Just because something is distasteful, it isn;t necessarily wrong.

 

[newtonfox]

Re: fryatt out

As I presume that the appeal decision would have been made after looking at video replays of the incident (from all angles), I don't quite see how this would have helped

It wont help fryatt but it could be of use in other times

 

[lcfc40]

Big loss, lets hope whoever takes his position in next few games steps up to the opportunity!!

 

[Melton Fox]

Big loss,!

Not really, he's hardly a world beater. Been playing better of late, but it aint no bog loss. If this is what is considered to be a "big loss", I must have too greater expectations of my team.

 

[Nottingham Fox]

Re: fryatt out

You really have got your knickers in a twist over this one. The Commission will have had all the angles available to them and will have looked at it from all the angles.

There was no need at all for Fryatt's elbow to be where it was - it matters very little on which part of the opponent's body it made contact. There are lessons to be leant from this - let's hope that Fryatt is bright enough to do so.

Fryatts arm was only where it was due to him being tugged from the player behind. Your natural instinct if someone pulled you from behind is to raise your arms to steady yourself. Fryatt did not swing at him, nor did he hit him in the face as the player appeared to suggest he had done. It was the ball.

The decision isn't going to be changed, but IMO they have got this wrong.

By far the greater number of City fans who have expressed an opinion agree with the referee

I think this has something to do with them only seeing the side angle, which I have openly stated doesn't do Fryatt any favours. I would be interested to see what the general feeling was if everyone had seen the rear view that Sky had shown last night.