Post by Macmoish on Mar 24, 2011 6:52:37 GMT
TELEGRAPH/Rory Smith
Manchester United
Lawyer in charge of hearing lambasts Sir Alex Ferguson's defence against FA charge
Sir Alex Ferguson's fractured relationship with the Football Association plumbed new depths after a disciplinary report accused the Manchester United manager of undermining the Respect campaign, harming the game's integrity and refusing to apologise for questioning referee Martin Atkinson's integrity.
Ferguson is serving a five-match touchline ban after being found guilty of improper conduct for his outburst at Atkinson following Manchester United's 2-1 defeat to Chelsea earlier this month.
He had suggested the official was neither "fair" nor "strong" enough for such a fixture. He said: "You want a fair referee, or a strong referee anyway – and we didn't get that. I must say, when I saw who the referee was I feared it. I feared the worst."
As well as his suspension, the Scot incurred a £30,000 fine.
The FA took the unusual – if not unprecedented – step of publishing the full findings of the Independent Regulatory Commission which examined the charge after Ferguson denied improper conduct.
The 10-page document revealed that the Commission, chaired by barrister Craig Moore, was unimpressed with Ferguson's defence that he immediately retracted the word "fair" in an interview conducted straight after the game at Stamford Bridge with United's own TV channel, MUTV.
It was, though, his refusal to issue any sort of apology, his decision to contest the charge, his long history of transgressions and the effect that his outburst had on the FA's continuing attempts to instil respect for referees which led to the severity of punishment meted out.
"Whatever view one may take about the performance of Mr. Atkinson, or any other [official], respect for their integrity is essential for the integrity of the game," wrote Mr Moore. "His vast experience ought to have left Sir Alex in no doubt as to how any sense of injustice he may have felt about the decisions, or performance of an official, should properly be channelled and expressed.
"Although it was his entitlement to do so, he denied the present charge in the face of a strong, if not compelling, case against him. Although he denied any intention to question Mr Atkinson's integrity, he should, at the very least, have realised the import of what he said.
"It follows that any credit to which Sir Alex may have been entitled by admitting the charge, and reduction in sanction, was lost. In addition, it follows from his denial of the charge that no clarification or retraction of any of his comments has been made by Sir Alex and no apology given to Mr Atkinson, even after the charge had been brought.
"The Commission regarded this as a serious aggravating feature and rejected Sir Alex's case that his use of the word "fair" was effectively retracted during the interview itself.
"The Commission also took the view that Sir Alex's comments undermined the attempts by the Association, through its 'Respect Campaign' to encourage higher standards of behaviour within the game, including respect for officials."
Ferguson and United were astonished by the length of ban handed out to the 69 year-old, particularly after Harry Redknapp, the Tottenham manager, escaped censure for suggesting that Mark Clattenburg and his assistants would collude to "get their story straight" after Nani scored a controversial goal for United against his side last year.
The Commission, though, rejected the notion that other cases in which charges were not brought could be relevant. "Even if we were to accept that the FA had not been consistent, that cannot amount to a defence to a charge that is brought," wrote Mr Moore.
The severity of the punishment may be explained, though, by Ferguson's litany of infringements. Mr Moore acknowledged that the Commission had been directed to "several misconduct charges" in Ferguson's past, not least his remarks over Alan Wiley's fitness in August 2009. That incident earned the Scot a four-match ban, with two suspended. Those two fixtures have now been invoked.
Mr Moore found that the Atkinson charge was more serious than the previous one and indicated that, as the "suspended touchline ban was … intended … to act as a deterrent" and that "Sir Alex knew the suspended ban was hanging over him … despite this, he has committed a further offence," a cumulative five-match ban would not be excessive.
www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/manchester-united/8402543/Lawyer-in-charge-of-hearing-lambasts-Sir-Alex-Fergusons-defence-against-FA-charge.html
The FA
Written reasons: Sir Alex Ferguson
Wednesday, 23 March, 2011
Full written reasons of recent Commission involving Sir Alex Ferguson.
On Wednesday 16 March 2011, Sir Alex Ferguson was fined £30,000, and given a total of a five-match touchline ban, two of which were suspended from a previous charge if improper conduct in November 2009.
The Manchester United manager denied a charge of improper conduct following media comments made in relation to match official Martin Atkinson, after United’s match against Chelsea at Stamford Bridge on 1 March 2011.
Full written reasons of the regulatory committee here. [ Ten Pages!]
www.thefa.com/TheFA/Disciplinary/NewsAndFeatures/2011/~/media/Files/PDF/TheFA/Disciplinary/Written%20reasons/The_Football_Association_v_Sir_Alex_Ferguson_-_Written_Reasons_for_the_Decision_of_the_Regulatory_Commission_held_on_16th_March_2011.ashx
www.thefa.com/TheFA/Disciplinary/NewsAndFeatures/2011/written-reasons-ferguson
Manchester United
Lawyer in charge of hearing lambasts Sir Alex Ferguson's defence against FA charge
Sir Alex Ferguson's fractured relationship with the Football Association plumbed new depths after a disciplinary report accused the Manchester United manager of undermining the Respect campaign, harming the game's integrity and refusing to apologise for questioning referee Martin Atkinson's integrity.
Ferguson is serving a five-match touchline ban after being found guilty of improper conduct for his outburst at Atkinson following Manchester United's 2-1 defeat to Chelsea earlier this month.
He had suggested the official was neither "fair" nor "strong" enough for such a fixture. He said: "You want a fair referee, or a strong referee anyway – and we didn't get that. I must say, when I saw who the referee was I feared it. I feared the worst."
As well as his suspension, the Scot incurred a £30,000 fine.
The FA took the unusual – if not unprecedented – step of publishing the full findings of the Independent Regulatory Commission which examined the charge after Ferguson denied improper conduct.
The 10-page document revealed that the Commission, chaired by barrister Craig Moore, was unimpressed with Ferguson's defence that he immediately retracted the word "fair" in an interview conducted straight after the game at Stamford Bridge with United's own TV channel, MUTV.
It was, though, his refusal to issue any sort of apology, his decision to contest the charge, his long history of transgressions and the effect that his outburst had on the FA's continuing attempts to instil respect for referees which led to the severity of punishment meted out.
"Whatever view one may take about the performance of Mr. Atkinson, or any other [official], respect for their integrity is essential for the integrity of the game," wrote Mr Moore. "His vast experience ought to have left Sir Alex in no doubt as to how any sense of injustice he may have felt about the decisions, or performance of an official, should properly be channelled and expressed.
"Although it was his entitlement to do so, he denied the present charge in the face of a strong, if not compelling, case against him. Although he denied any intention to question Mr Atkinson's integrity, he should, at the very least, have realised the import of what he said.
"It follows that any credit to which Sir Alex may have been entitled by admitting the charge, and reduction in sanction, was lost. In addition, it follows from his denial of the charge that no clarification or retraction of any of his comments has been made by Sir Alex and no apology given to Mr Atkinson, even after the charge had been brought.
"The Commission regarded this as a serious aggravating feature and rejected Sir Alex's case that his use of the word "fair" was effectively retracted during the interview itself.
"The Commission also took the view that Sir Alex's comments undermined the attempts by the Association, through its 'Respect Campaign' to encourage higher standards of behaviour within the game, including respect for officials."
Ferguson and United were astonished by the length of ban handed out to the 69 year-old, particularly after Harry Redknapp, the Tottenham manager, escaped censure for suggesting that Mark Clattenburg and his assistants would collude to "get their story straight" after Nani scored a controversial goal for United against his side last year.
The Commission, though, rejected the notion that other cases in which charges were not brought could be relevant. "Even if we were to accept that the FA had not been consistent, that cannot amount to a defence to a charge that is brought," wrote Mr Moore.
The severity of the punishment may be explained, though, by Ferguson's litany of infringements. Mr Moore acknowledged that the Commission had been directed to "several misconduct charges" in Ferguson's past, not least his remarks over Alan Wiley's fitness in August 2009. That incident earned the Scot a four-match ban, with two suspended. Those two fixtures have now been invoked.
Mr Moore found that the Atkinson charge was more serious than the previous one and indicated that, as the "suspended touchline ban was … intended … to act as a deterrent" and that "Sir Alex knew the suspended ban was hanging over him … despite this, he has committed a further offence," a cumulative five-match ban would not be excessive.
www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/manchester-united/8402543/Lawyer-in-charge-of-hearing-lambasts-Sir-Alex-Fergusons-defence-against-FA-charge.html
The FA
Written reasons: Sir Alex Ferguson
Wednesday, 23 March, 2011
Full written reasons of recent Commission involving Sir Alex Ferguson.
On Wednesday 16 March 2011, Sir Alex Ferguson was fined £30,000, and given a total of a five-match touchline ban, two of which were suspended from a previous charge if improper conduct in November 2009.
The Manchester United manager denied a charge of improper conduct following media comments made in relation to match official Martin Atkinson, after United’s match against Chelsea at Stamford Bridge on 1 March 2011.
Full written reasons of the regulatory committee here. [ Ten Pages!]
www.thefa.com/TheFA/Disciplinary/NewsAndFeatures/2011/~/media/Files/PDF/TheFA/Disciplinary/Written%20reasons/The_Football_Association_v_Sir_Alex_Ferguson_-_Written_Reasons_for_the_Decision_of_the_Regulatory_Commission_held_on_16th_March_2011.ashx
www.thefa.com/TheFA/Disciplinary/NewsAndFeatures/2011/written-reasons-ferguson