Jump to content

Evra banned for 4 games following Chelsea Fracas


byatt

Recommended Posts

Patrice Evra has been banned for four matches and fined £15,000 following last season's post-match altercation with a groundsman at Stamford Bridge.

The Football Association (FA) found the Manchester United defender guilty of improper conduct.

Evra, whose ban runs from 22 December, was involved in a confrontation with Chelsea groundsman Sam Bethell.

Chelsea were fined £25,000 for failing to ensure an employee conducted himself in an orderly fashion.

More soon.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/t...sea/7764530.stm

Link to comment
Share on other sites


I read that a minute ago in another sports site. F***ing sweet - finally a bit of justice going against Red Nose.

God, I am so happy I can't describe it ! ::clap2::

And it's coming against one of their most consistent performers just before the heaviest period during the season.

YESSSSSS ! :huh: :yay:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Justice is served for once, the fine is pathetic but the match ban is satisfactory, in fact - bloody sweet. The prat wouldn't leave the area our guy was sorting out (or something similar) - if he decides to kick off coz he was pissed off, the petulant child deserves it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Chelsea were fined £25,000 for failing to ensure an employee conducted himself in an orderly fashion.

Interesting precedent. Were Manure fined that amount when Cantona kung-fu kicked that Palace fan or when Rooney got his police caution over the summer? The implications are pretty enormous any time a player does something disorderly

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting precedent. Were Manure fined that amount when Cantona kung-fu kicked that Palace fan or when Rooney got his police caution over the summer? The implications are pretty enormous any time a player does something disorderly

It is not a precedent as far as the law is concerned.

This is called "vicarious liability" and it regards employees only during the execution of their profession - meaning, as a part of a legal entity, not as individuals. The FA can't punish the guy himself, since he represented Chelsea FC during the incident, so they punish the club. The club later decides whether it will take any actions against the employee. Personally, I would give him a raise :huh:

I don't know what Cantona got for his karate kick, but if Rooney wasn't on training or something like that, there is no reason to punish ManU for any police caution he received.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, well, well, what was potentially one of the big news stories of the season for the tabloids - Chelsea Employee Found Guilty of Racism - will now be hastily passed off as a ’not proven’ incident instead of providing masses of vitriolic copy. Those United fans who anticipate an appeal will be doing so more in hope than expectation because their club have already taken matters as far as they can [by playing the race card] and there really is nothing left for them to say on the issue after that spurious counterclaim failed.

However, with regard to both this particular incident and along with others involving United, what has to be said about the UK’s leave-no-stone-unturned investigative journalism and prying Media camera work is that they all seem to give up a little too early for my liking. For instance, now would be an ideal time to go all in and seek out the guy who heard the racist slur, challenge him on why he was the only one who did hear it, and do a full page spread on why people like him do such a disservice to the Kick Racism Out of Football Campaign by treating it so frivolously.

All I have read so far on the subject is a muted couple of paragraphs in the Times giving the verdict, on a page that is otherwise dominated by Ferguson’s views on the title race, and even in that limited space he is given neither anonymity or a first name, so quick are they to be dismissive. To be fair to the Telegraph, they have given a more complete picture that includes CFC’s statement and have also gone as far as to put someone ’in the frame’ as it were by stating that ‘It is thought United assistant manager Mike Phelan was the man who claimed Bethell used racist language towards Evra.’ The possibility that this little snippet of information might also slide quickly into not proven territory should newshounds gather around it probably prevented the writer from gnawing at that bone, but, then again, the rest of the article hardly showed that he had an appetite for getting to the nub of this matter anyway. Ah, how different it would all have been had Sam Bethell been found guilty…

First and foremost, carnival time for Rio, as he hails the FA’s decision to denounce a racist and leave the Chelsea hierarchy no option but to sack their disgraced employee and hang their vicariously liable heads in shame. Next we would have had the spectacle of every future incident of this kind being referred to as another ‘Bethell Case’ with Sky repeating their film footage of the affair ad nauseam and loving every Evra moment. Last, but by no means least, Gordon Taylor would trot out and on to our screens to moan about the stresses and strains his PFA members are under when confronted by lawn moving operatives such as these inciting violence through racial comment. Having no truck with Bethell, the trailer for Taylor would no doubt have been counselling for the much maligned Evra, presumably at his own home or at the establishment he wanted Mutu to go to all those years ago.

Back in the real world, the only sensible conclusion to be drawn from the events that occurred, other than to praise the FA for a thorough [albeit laborious] investigation and rational verdict, is that footballers in general do not like losing and the Manchester United ones are no exception. Some clubs have got deflecting criticism after a defeat down to a fine art with Arsenal the pizza, as opposed to past(a) masters. They were also not averse to starting a major punch up when facing defeat against us a few years back, that result disappearing off of the back pages faster than their Premiership winning chances do every season. What United failed to recognise on this occasion, however, was that even the top clubs cannot afford to overstep the mark when it comes to excusing conduct. Not prepared to simply hold their hands up to the charges against Evra they sought to provide a justification for his actions knowing full well the consequences for Bethell should he be found guilty as charged.

Probably earning less in a year than Evra earns in a week, the guy’s livelihood was put on the line without compunction and he must be eternally grateful that he works for a club prepared to back him rather than one that seeks a cop out for themselves regardless of the consequences for others outside of their sphere. In short, United made the conscious decision to back Evra by going to extremes on the contentious moral issue of racial tolerance. It would appear that nothing else mattered to them and, if the written press and Media continue to react so apathetically when a verdict such as this doesn’t suit, we can only assume that normal lip service is resumed and the cosy cartel continues, at least until the old boy at the club's helm retires. Please, please, please, somebody, somewhere on a national newspaper or TV Sports channel, prove me wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Excellent analysis. Can't say I'd seen the full implications of the verdict, so thanks for pointing them out, as no one in the media is going to. Or do I hear Patrick Collins typing out a diatribe against Manure for their failed attempt to play the race card to clear one of their players of assault? Er, no. I know that lying to a court about a case of diarrhoea was sufficient to get Fergie off a charge of driving on the hard shoulder to avoid a traffic queue, so they must be amazed they havce succeeded this time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Anyone know what games Evra will miss? It seems he's playing today so he's not suspended yet.

Will he miss the game against us?

No, he comes back from suspension in time to play us. The 4 games he is out are against cupcake opponents.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I saw the verdict the wording was

"The FA has found insufficient evidence to the merit the claims of racial abuse by Sam Bethell"

So despite Rio and Park being right there, Evra could find nobody to back up his story, eh? Why is it those that cry wolf on racism arent just as thoroughly raked over the coals for brining the whole "kick racism out" campaigns into disrepute. Uhh, "paging Samuel Eto'o"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Much as we all love to take every available opportunity to drag ManU’s already sullied name through the dirt, even I had thought that enough was enough on the Evra incident. Yet the assault on our lawn mowing operative refuses to go away and it almost beggars belief that it is the Mancs themselves who insist on a continual rake through the entrails of the FA decision to impose a four match ban as suitable punishment…

We all know by now that this verdict was greeted with gasps of astonishment from everybody at Old Trafford with Fergie describing it as “the worst decision I have ever known.†I remember thinking at the time - that bad, eh Alex, well might I suggest an appeal? Back [through sources] came the apoplectic reply that they were considering one, oh yes, very definitely, almost certainly, they were considering one. Well you would, wouldn’t you, what with it being the worst decision ever known. How could any appeal, packed, as it would be, with indisputable proof of innocence, fail? Yet days passed, some games of football were even played by certain players, and nothing happened…

Apparently the FA’s ’supporting evidence’ was a’coming through for United’s consideration and there was a delay - of course there was, and by implication this shifty state of affairs cast doubt on the FA’s whole stance on the matter. What had the FA to hide? Did they make their decision purely to spite a great club as they had done so many times over the years? Fergie, unable to leave the subject alone, but seemingly impotent action-wise, let his usual media gathering know that, should he ever be seated at the breakfast table with the FA decision makers, he wouldn’t have a clue what they were thinking. Thank heavens for such discretion, I would have thought, especially with an appeal edging slowly towards the cast iron certainty stage. Yet days passed, some footballers even went off to the other side of the world, and nothing happened…

And now, courtesy of the Manchester Evening News, we find that Evra himself is “…very angry about it because I didn’t touch anybody. “ At last all is revealed! Evra has been framed and the truth will out. Surely a statement will follow shortly from the United hierarchy and, yes, hot on the heels of this bombshell comes word from David Gill [no less] and the definitive comments on this issue are now well and truly in the public domain. Let’s hear it for David [as well as from him, of course]…

"We looked at the situation carefully and discussed it with Alex (Ferguson) and Patrice himself," Good, good, very wise in the circumstances, if I might say so. Sorry to interrupt…

"We were very disappointed by the size of the ban. We thought it was disproportionate and a poor decision.†C'mon cut to the chase, Dave, we’re on tender hooks here!

"But we felt, given the games he would miss, the issues surrounding an appeal and the distraction it would cause at a key stage in the season, it would be better to take it on the chin and move on†You what? You what? You what, you what, YOU WHAT?!?!? That can’t be the end of it, surely, not now you’ve got all the facts, the supporting evidence, the witnesses, the watertight case for chrissake!! No, oh good you still have something more to say…

"Patrice is a wonderful character and I believe him 100% when he says he never hit the groundsman. He has our full support. We don't like the decision and we don't think it reflects other decisions for improper conduct charges being found. But we move on." Gordon Bennett, Dave, after the last week or so’s claptrap you lot have come out with to stop ‘it moving on’, how on earth do you expect us to believe you when you say you want to call it a day now? If this is an example of Manchester United in ’full support’ mode, no wonder you waited until you were on the other side of world before signing off on the subject - can’t hear the laughter when you are that far away.

Anyway, let’s leave the last word to the Manchester Evening News shall we - “After top-level discussions at Old Trafford, it was decided to accept the punishment, which includes two matches against lower-league opposition, rather than delay it with an appeal that could see the penalty increased. Evra agreed with the stance. But that does not mean he is happy at the outcome.†Oi, Editor, if you are going to merely be the club’s mouthpiece on matters such as these, at least have the decency to explain just why the penalty might increase on appeal. Could it possibly have something to do with the frivolousness involved in, for want of a better phrase, flogging a very dead horse?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First and foremost, carnival time for Rio, as he hails the FA’s decision to denounce a racist and leave the Chelsea hierarchy no option but to sack their disgraced employee and hang their vicariously liable heads in shame. Next we would have had the spectacle of every future incident of this kind being referred to as another ‘Bethell Case’ with Sky repeating their film footage of the affair ad nauseam and loving every Evra moment. Last, but by no means least, Gordon Taylor would trot out and on to our screens to moan about the stresses and strains his PFA members are under when confronted by lawn moving operatives such as these inciting violence through racial comment. Having no truck with Bethell, the trailer for Taylor would no doubt have been counselling for the much maligned Evra, presumably at his own home or at the establishment he wanted Mutu to go to all those years ago.

Very good post Dorset. What got to me most was how Rio managed to entirely escape punishment after booting a female Chelsea steward in a rage after the match. Oh, and how Owen Hargreaves also avoided censure for damaging a dressing room door and launching a foul-mouthed tirade at the ref. I hope we at least sent him the bill.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very good post Dorset. What got to me most was how Rio managed to entirely escape punishment after booting a female Chelsea steward in a rage after the match. Oh, and how Owen Hargreaves also avoided censure for damaging a dressing room door and launching a foul-mouthed tirade at the ref. I hope we at least sent him the bill.

Rio received the usual media leniency, Englishman, and Hargreaves has also managed to stay out of the spotlight. United have manipulated this story without rebuke for far too long, but I see there is a new topic that shows the FA are fighting back - at last!

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Archived

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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...
Please Sign In or Sign Up

Well, this is awkward!

Happy Tech GIF by Atlassian

The Shed End Forum relies on revenue to pay for hosting and upgrades. While we try to keep adverts as unobtrusive as possible without pop ups, we need to run ad's to make sure we can stay online and continue to keep the forum up, as over the years costs have become very high.

Could you please allow adverts on this domain by switching it off. Some of the advert banners can actually be closed to avoid interferance of your experience on The Shed End.

Cheers now!

Sure, let me in!