Aliadiere Receives Increased Ban
Current Appeal Procedure Called into Question
The aftermath of the Middlesbrough striker's sending off at Anfield on February 23rd has left a number of different parties seeing red.
With only five minutes to go,and his side narrowly trailing 3-2 in their away game to Liverpool, Middlesbrough front man Jeremie Aliadiere became embroiled in an altercation with Red’s midfielder Javier Mascherano which saw the Boro player issued with a straight red card, whilst Mascherano escaped without punishment. While the whole on-field incident appeared reminiscent of the beginning of a Three Stooges routine, with the Argentinean seeming to provoke Aliadiere by pinching his nose causing the Frenchman to retaliate by slapping Mascherano across the face, many now feel that the actual farce took place several days later. It was then that the FA appeal panel requested by Middlesbrough to review the decision not only upheld Aliadiere’s three game suspension, but tacked on a further one game ban for the frivolous nature of the request for the hearing.
Panel’s plus points need protection
The principle behind the appeal panel is a very commendable one. Often a red card is issued in the heat of a moment by a referee who has only had one opportunity to see the incident at full speed and several seconds to consider it. The panel offers an impartial and considered review into whether the decision made by the official was, in fact, the correct one.
Obviously, preventative measures need be in place to stop anyone from abusing the existence of the panel or wasting its time, but there is currently disquiet over the nature of these and the way they are implemented.
Uncertainty surrounds powers
In many ways, Aliadiere’s case was similar to the one involving Michael Essien’s sending off against Derby, which the panel simply rejected without imposing further punishment. Although the important difference between the two may have been that it was at least debatable whether Essien acted with intent whereas it was obvious that Aliadiere did so, both clubs are currently involved in tight races – Chelsea for the Premiership title and Middlesbrough for Premiership survival – and neither would want a key player missing for any longer than necessary. By wielding the threat of extending suspensions, the panel could actually be undermining its own existence as teams and players, especially those further down the football pyramid where squads are smaller and appearance bonuses more important, may decide that an appeal is not worth the risk.
It may also appear perverse to some that Birmingham’s Martin Taylor only received a three game ban for an offence that was so bad that an appeal against it would never succeed, whilst Aliadiere now has to sit out four matches simply for making use of the official avenue available for such matters.
Middlesbrough are likely to be angered further by the fact that the same technology used to reach the decision that their appeal was a waste of time has led to absolutely no action has being taken against Mascherano, who not only provoked Aliadiere but did so by raising his hands to the Boro man’s face.
With all these points currently in discussion, and the panel the first and last venue for most disciplinary matters of this nature, it may be that the full extend of its powers and how it applies these needs to be codified with greater certainty for it to be an institution those in the game have confidence in.
