Evra banned and fined by FA

[Litmuss]

Manchester United defender Patrice Evra has been banned for four matches from 22nd December and fined £15,000 after the Football Association found him guilty of improper conduct.

The decision follows United's Premier League match against Chelsea at Stamford Bridge on 26th April when Evra clashed with Chelsea groundsman Sam Bethell during an on-pitch warm-down.

Chelsea were fined £25,000 after two charges of failing to ensure an employee conducted himself in an orderly fashion were proven.

However, an allegation that Bethell had 'engaged in racist conduct or language' was not proven.

"Manchester United notes the announcement from the FA and is disappointed with the decision and in particular considers the sanctions against Patrice Evra excessive," said a United statement.

"Manchester United and Patrice will consider all options once there has been an opportunity to digest the full reasons for the decision."

A statement on Chelsea's official website said: "Chelsea would like to thank the Football Association for their decision that there was no racist element involved in the incident between Patrice Evra and Sam Bethell, a member of the Chelsea ground staff.

"Chelsea always strenuously denied the racist allegation and that position has been totally vindicated by the FA.

"Alleging racism is one of the most serious accusations that can be made in football. Chelsea has a zero-tolerance attitude towards racism and is fighting hard with the rest of football to rid all forms of discrimination from the game.

"Clearly, the incident was a regrettable one. We will be analysing the detail of the verdict before commenting further."

Details

An FA statement read: "The regulatory commission found a charge of improper conduct against Patrice Evra proved on all four elements of the charge.

"The Commission found that his conduct during a warm-down session following the Chelsea v Manchester United, Premier League fixture on April 26 2008, was improper in that:

"a) Mr Evra pushed the Chelsea head groundsman with his chest (as was admitted by Mr Evra)

"b) He struck Mr Sam Bethell, a groundsman at Chelsea, on the side of his head

"c) He subsequently, ie after the previous incident had begun to calm down, ran back to confront Mr Bethell again (as was also admitted by Mr Evra)

"d) Then became involved in a further physical altercation with Mr Bethell.

"The Commission considered this was an incident of violent behaviour by Mr Evra which was therefore punished by a suspension for four first team matches as from Monday, December 22 and imposed a fine of £15,000 on Mr Evra.

"The Regulatory Commission found two charges against Chelsea both proved. On the first charge the Commission found that during the course of the same incidents connected with the warm-down by Manchester United players, Chelsea employee Mr Sam Bethell, had conducted himself in a disorderly fashion and that his conduct and language had been abusive and provocative.

"Charges against Mr Bethell had previously been dismissed on the ground that the FA had no jurisdiction over him personally. Chelsea were charged because they failed in their responsibility to ensure that their

employee Mr Bethell conducted himself in an orderly fashion and refrained from abusive and provocative conduct and language. The commission fined Chelsea £25,000 on this charge.

"An allegation that Mr Bethell had engaged in racist conduct or language was not proved. Accordingly, so far as the charge against Chelsea was based on its alleged responsibility for such racist conduct and language by Mr Bethell, the charge against the club was not proved.

"A second charge against Chelsea of failure to specify in Mr Bethell's contract of employment by the club that Mr Bethell was directly under the disciplinary control of the FA was upheld but the commission did not find it appropriate to impose any penalty on that charge.

"Mr Evra and Chelsea were each ordered to pay half the costs of the regulatory commission proceedings."

http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528,11095_4593815,00.html

Well deserved bans for Evra which should not be tolerated in football. For the counts that he admitted, MU fans cannot deny he did not commit any wrongdoings. Somemore tried to accuse people of racism.

[hiei02]

can of worms.

and the racism part, it's not proven, doesn't mean it may not be true. if it is, i'm jolly pleased that evra joined in the ranks of zidane, cantona etc, who did what they think was right.

[spykid]

Well done Patrice. And don't give me crap that there is no racism involved.

[Carova.]

admit alsho must fine... sho he will learn his lesson

[Pyro77]

The racism just can't be proved. Doesn't mean it doesn't happen.

Just like how Drogba dives but since the referee didn't see it was a dive, he gave a penalty. The opposition can't prove it, but doesn't mean he didn't dive ;)

[Litmuss]

The racism just can't be proved. Doesn't mean it doesn't happen.

Just like how Drogba dives but since the referee didn't see it was a dive, he gave a penalty. The opposition can't prove it, but doesn't mean he didn't dive ;)

Unless proven, else he's innocent la. You can talk all the bull about cows flying but no evidence to back you up - Pointless. The fact about Evra physical abuse is on video and the man admitted himself. No arguement abt that.

And why strayed to Drogba? The same goes for Ronaldo for his countless dives if you ever decide to mention. Stick to the topic.

[ahgohgoh]

too bad the witnesses are tevez and park... two not so good english speakers...

i am just wondering why chelsea was so eager to make david gill tell the public there's no problem with man utd and chelsea...

[poring24]

park can speak english one...tevez....there's always interpreters aren't there

[Pyro77]

Unless proven, else he's innocent la. You can talk all the bull about cows flying but no evidence to back you up - Pointless. The fact about Evra physical abuse is on video and the man admitted himself. No arguement abt that.

And why strayed to Drogba? The same goes for Ronaldo for his countless dives if you ever decide to mention. Stick to the topic.

Yup, same goes for Ronaldo and whoever else you want to mention that makes you happy.

:s8:


I mentioned the dives as a way of illustrating that doesn't mean it's not proven it didn't happen. Get that in your head.

[the_ron]

ell deserved bans for a hooligan and loser like Evra which should not be tolerated in football. For the counts that he admitted, MU fans cannot deny he did not commit any wrongdoings. Somemore tried to accuse people of racism.

how ironic, calling Evra a hooligan when Chelsea have none other than John Terry in their ranks :s13:

[kurenai]

I think Man Utd will miss evra for the 4 games. In my opinion he along with gael clichy is the best full backs in epl

[Litmuss]

too bad the witnesses are tevez and park... two not so good english speakers...

i am just wondering why chelsea was so eager to make david gill tell the public there's no problem with man utd and chelsea...

Chelsea was trying their best to help MU contain their can of worms but was least appreciated. Afterall, Chelsea was in light-hearted mood after defeating MU, but David Gill looks it as an opportunity that can inflict damage to chelsea, but was sadly backfired.

[spykid]

Chelsea was trying their best to help MU contain their can of worms but was least appreciated. Afterall, Chelsea was in light-hearted mood after defeating MU, but David Gill looks it as an opportunity that can inflict damage to chelsea, but was sadly backfired.

This is fecking hilarious :s13::s13:

[Carnage]

Talk until kingdom come also banned 4 games. Well done.
First the manager then his players.

[soldado]

London FA mah. What do you expect.

[Carnage]

London FA mah. What do you expect.

Meaning? He doesn't deserveto be banned?

[Litmuss]

London FA mah. What do you expect.

So if FA in Manchester, means MU stand to gain? :s13:
Who here will expect MU to appeal? If they appeal and fail, i think slap back 1 more additional ban to make it 5 bans. :D

Afterall, the four matches Evra will be missing are meaningless matches.

[poring24]

So if FA in Manchester, means MU stand to gain? :s13:
Who here will expect MU to appeal? If they appeal and fail, i think slap back 1 more additional ban to make it 5 bans. :D

Afterall, the four matches Evra will be missing are meaningless matches.

I phail to see your logic. If they are meaningless, losing all of them will be asking us to hand the trophy over, and winning all of them will be 12 points in the bag.

And why are you nitpicking over the geography of the FA? He's just trying to point out that the FA(which is situated in London) apparently has a thing against Man Utd.

[Litmuss]

I phail to see your logic. If they are meaningless, losing all of them will be asking us to hand the trophy over, and winning all of them will be 12 points in the bag.

And why are you nitpicking over the geography of the FA? He's just trying to point out that the FA(which is situated in London) apparently has a thing against Man Utd.

Not I trying to pick the geographical location of the FA, it's sodaldo who is. If FA say FA lah, these's only one FA in England and you can't find in anywhere else in England, so why must he stressed "London" FA? Obviously he's trying to elborate, enhance, highlight whatever you want to call it on the special location of FA - which is London.

Against Stoke, Middlebrough, southampton....... certainly no harm in losing Evra right? Unless you guys got no confidence in ur stand-in backup. ;)

[hiei02]

c'mon. a month of holiday for evra. let's be happy for him. :s13:

[1920_me]

Don't worry about us. We will cope very well without Evra


Friday, 26 December 2008
Barclays Premier League
Stoke v Man Utd,

Monday, 29 December 2008
Barclays Premier League
Man Utd v Middlesbrough,

Sunday, 04 January 2009
The FA Cup sponsored by E.ON
Southampton v Man Utd, R3, 16:00

Carling Cup Semi-finals - first leg week commencing Jan 5,
second leg week commencing Jan 19


He will be back in time to face Chelksi. Considering that he would not have played two of those games and stoke and southampton are not exactly the toughest of fixtures.It's a covenient time,if any, for the suspension.

I wish that Evra now would make a Cantona-like statement: "I don't regret it, and I wish I'd hit him harder".

[RVN]

this is a farce, FA siding with chelsea shocker.:yawn:

[Wryer]

Kindly avoid distasteful attachments.

To be honest, I thought Man Utd came off worse in the punishment.

But the cause of the incident is still unclear - which complicates things. What really caused the fiasco?

[Michael Shoemaker]

chelsea got a fine instead iirc ?

coz it is the backroom staff or the groundsman having the brawl with them. not the chelsea players.

:s22:

[RVN]

why is the groundstaff not punished then, he threw punches as well. :s22:

[demongod]

chelsea are full of hooligans loh.... everytime a decision goes against them, the whole team surrounds the referee to pressure him

[demongod]

the staff is not punished because the FA does not have jurisdiction over them

why is the groundstaff not punished then, he threw punches as well. :s22:

[1920_me]

Please la, you think Evra anyhow go and fight with the groundsman for no reason izzit??

You think there is fire without smoke?

[Jackson Ng Ghim Pheng]

c'mon. a month of holiday for evra. let's be happy for him. :s13:

Don't worry about us. We will cope very well without Evra

He will be back in time to face Chelksi. Considering that he would not have played two of those games and stoke and southampton are not exactly the toughest of fixtures.It's a covenient time,if any, for the suspension.

I wish that Evra now would make a Cantona-like statement: "I don't regret it, and I wish I'd hit him harder".

this is a farce, FA siding with chelsea shocker.:yawn:

why is the groundstaff not punished then, he threw punches as well. :s22:

1) haha great can see o shea play.

2) so sure that man u won't drop any points ? almost did against sunderland already.

3) FA side with Chelsea ? nah FA never do that and Evra admit to all charges that he whack the chelsea groundstaff then what you think the FA should have done then after Evra Admit that he whack that fellow - give him a small fine and ask him to apologise ?? LOL :s13:

4) Chelsea got fine in behalf of the chelsea groundstaff.

[Jackson Ng Ghim Pheng]

and those man u fans that don't even know that Evra is banned for 5 matches as he already pick up 5 yellow cards which result in an automatic ban

[hail2fire]

and those man u fans that don't even know that Evra is banned for 5 matches as he already pick up 5 yellow cards which result in an automatic ban

The (Oh so concerned with United) Chelsea fan should also know that the 1 match ban is against spurs and not included with the 4 fixtures 1920_me stated

[ahgohgoh]

why is the groundstaff not punished then, he threw punches as well. :s22:

because he's not under the FA... hence the FA are in no position to punish him... which means you missed the chance calling him a "hooligan" and a loser...

[lyfeforce]

Guys, you are all losing the plot here. Relax for a while.

Evra did deserve to get banned. Whether you were provoked or not, getting physical is a crime anywhere. However, I do feel that 4 matches is a ban too harsh. 3 would have sufficed. Having said that, the FA's location in London is not an issue. Drogba got banned for throwing back a coin. If Gerrard did something similar, then he should get banned too. The rules are there for a reason and should apply to everyone.

If the groundsman at Chelsea's ground did indeed hurl racist remarks at Evra, he should be sacked and personal fine. I'm not surprised because racism is rampant in football, worse in other European nations.

[spykid]

That was 123456 mins after the game when the thing happened, so i can't see why the FA should step in but mind their own business. They are obviously keeping quiet on the racism thing as English football will be in the wrong spotlight if there are allegations of it. It was exactly the same with Ledley King.


And oh dear, i am deluded :s13:

[Asakura]

i don't understand why you're so fond of harping on rio's case. if you sit down for a min and think, it was completely unintentional, unless you're telling me that the lady steward made funny faces at rio.

i'm sure you define "sore loser" as someone who "make ANY kind of defence to evra's case". but most of us here are pretty justified by our comments. evra deserves some sort of ban for his conduct. but on the flip side, what provoked evra in the 1st place? and 4 matches ban is ridiculously harsh.

basically which ever poster here says evra don't deserve the 4 match ban, or man united shld appeal. or any sort in between the lines that suggest the slightest advantage towards man united is adjudged by him and his co-fan as sore loser, or any of the sorts they had already mentioned. basically its all abt almighty chelsea.

okay then let's conclude. man united players deserved to be fined, banned for their act kicking on steward, punching on groundsman, splitting on another player, throwing a coin or a karate kick onto the fans and for the times they surround the match officials when a decision goes against them.

hail almighty chelsea. they are always right.
oh yea btw congrats on setting a new record of away wins.

[MatrixFanatic]

You can ban Evra but you cannot ban Manutd's true destiny to WIN.:s13:

[ahgohgoh]

Just wondering, has it been established who provoked who? For me, that's the crux of the incident. The one who started the provocation must be punished heavier. If there is no establishment of that fact, it will be difficult to say who's in the wrong and who deserves the punishment.

But I still think Man Utd came off worse in the decision. A player being banned for more than 2 games is probably the second most disruptive punishment can get, behind point deduction. A fine means nothing to top clubs nowadays.

agreed... who provoked who?

the picture that showed evra sticking out his tongue while the other guy being stopped from hitting him is deceiving...

i keep wondering why chelsea tried to downplay it and even asked david gill to declare that nothing much happened in the incident...

i dont think the chelsea groundman got any punishment from this incident... i think he's still working there? he hasn't been sacked or stopped from working has he? evra, on the other hand, got 4 matches ban. right he deserves to be punished, but there's no equality because the FA has no jurisdiction over the groundsman...

if chelsea was fined 25k for "failure to control" their groundsman, which is more than what evra was fined, would that mean a larger fault on the groundman's part? i am having the impression that chelsea are very happy to take the 25k fine... and why is that?

my "very biased" analysis :s13:

[soldado]

agreed... who provoked who?

the picture that showed evra sticking out his tongue while the other guy being stopped from hitting him is deceiving...

i keep wondering why chelsea tried to downplay it and even asked david gill to declare that nothing much happened in the incident...

i dont think the chelsea groundman got any punishment from this incident... i think he's still working there? he hasn't been sacked or stopped from working has he? evra, on the other hand, got 4 matches ban. right he deserves to be punished, but there's no equality because the FA has no jurisdiction over the groundsman...

if chelsea was fined 25k for "failure to control" their groundsman, which is more than what evra was fined, would that mean a larger fault on the groundman's part? i am having the impression that chelsea are very happy to take the 25k fine... and why is that?

my "very biased" analysis :s13:

25k is peanuts to EPLians. :s22:

[soldado]

huh...

it is disturbing when you merge two separate incidents into one... ferdinand's and evra's incidents are separate... unless you are telling me that the groundsman was angry with ferdinand kicking his friend in the tunnel and decided to lash out at his defensive partner evra...

or else pls stick to one at a time because you are getting nowhere other than repeating calling man utd players sore losers at the moment...

if you think evra is solely responsible, then why was chelsea fined 25k by the FA?

what's the guideline of warming down ah? use half the pitch?

As far as i know, there ain't any guidelines.
Probably the groundmen wanted to go home earlier. :s13:

[hiei02]

let's face it. whether we like it or not, it will be a day in hell before GP starts praising man utd or fans. so let's just let him grow out of it, while we stick to what we do best. talk football.

[YouYongku]

dont believe that no racist remarks.....

[Wryer]

i think the moderator should address this issue of "man utd fans mocking other fans" thingy...

i dont think it's fair for this fella's constant accusations...

or is it occasion entries from ppl from edmw who claim to be man utd fans?

i just dont understand why, when there's GP around in this forum, it gets so tensed and so many accusations and defending and accusations and defending.. it's like a badminton match going on in which someone is looking for the smash...

i think litmus made a rather good thread to discuss but it has turned out to what we expected...

It's difficult for the moderator to know which comments are mocking and which are not. Some of you are very good at making clever snide remarks without being direct.

I'm not pinpointing Man Utd fans, in particular. IMO fans of all 4 big clubs have had an opportunity to do so at one point of time or another.

The issue here is knowing when to stop. Feeling delight at one's own team's success and a rival's setback is understandable but rubbing it in? That's really too much, isn't it? You guys know who I'm talking about. It may not be the whole club's fans' pattern but all it takes is one black sheep. It's time to act like adults, not small kids poking fun at each other.

We wouldn't want Wryer to put a new rule where fans can only post news related to their own clubs, do we? We are football fans first, then the club fans.

On the note of Evra's ban, it is too harsh but there's nothing to be done until the appeal is heard. Arguments between Man Utd's and Chelsea's fans aren't gonna help the matter.

lyfeforce sums up my response.

As much as I would like to say every club's fans are perfect - it's far from so. There are a small group from every club that takes every opportunity to poke at other clubs, whether direct or indirect or disguised. I know the joy of doing so, but when it becomes consistent, it becomes irritating, then it becomes offensive. I don't want to name names, those people know who they are.

And unfortunately, fans resonate more to criticisms (whether fact or fiction) than praises. It therefore results in people remembering members that are stepping on their toes previously. And they retaliate when the opportunity arise.

But I strongly condemn generalizations from anyone. And so far, I see generalizations from fans of various clubs. Who's the source? I'm not sure, neither do I think anyone is sure unless one brave soul wants to dig a 8 year archive.

I can ban, infract, delete such posts, but it will never stop. This has been proven so by my observations. Members here bear grudges regardless of whether moderating punishments have been taken. Unless we have one camp that has the class to start the ball rolling. Unfortunately, I don't that happening anytime soon.

And yes, Litmuss has started a perfectly legitimate thread.

Evil cycle.

[Wryer]

The reverse happens for other club fans. No doubt about it. The difference is the rest of you bring the issue back to your own thread to curse and swear at the opposing team, but NGP don't have the avenue to do so because there aren't many fans in their thread. So the only way for him to vent his frustration is through the public main page.

It's an objective explanation of his behavior, but it is not a permitted behavior in our forum. As for why the situation is so, that's a discussion for another day.

And another difference is, some take the forum more serious than others.

I strongly discourage irresponsible actions and comments from anyone.

[Jackson Ng Ghim Pheng]

Sir Alex Ferguson has hit out at the FA after they banned Patrice Evra for four games following the Frenchman's clash with a Chelsea groundsman last season.

Manchester United left-back Evra will miss forthcoming Barclays Premier League games with Tottenham (due to him receiving five bookings), Stoke, Middlesbrough, Southampton and Derby after the FA handed him what appears to be a severe sentence at a hearing last week.

And Ferguson has finally given his response to the punishment today, hinting that United may appeal.

Old Trafford manager Ferguson said this afternoon: 'It was a shock.

'Of all the things that the FA have done to us over the years, this was still a big shock.

'We awaiting for the written reasons for it to be delivered to [chief executive] David Gill.
Sir Alex Ferguson

'So we can't say yet what our next step will be. That's where we are.'

Evra was found guilty of improper conduct last week after clashing with Chelsea groundsman Sam Bethell following United's 2-1 loss at Stamford Bridge last April.

Evidence heard at the hearing suggested the Frenchman had punched the Chelsea employee.

Asked today if there was an FA vendetta against United, Ferguson replied: 'I don't know.

'You can never guess what these people are doing.

'I can't tell you.

'I would not know if I was sitting at the breakfast table with them.'

Ferguson was speaking at his press conference ahead of tomorrow's Champions League clash with Danish side Aalborg at Old Trafford.

Club captain Gary Neville will make a rare start but Cristiano Ronaldo is unlikely to make the team after hurting his hip against Sunderland at the weekend.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-1093227/Fergie-fuming-Evra-ban-United-boss-shocked-severe-FA-punishment.html

What big shock is he talking about Evra deserve to be ban in more matches for fighting ! Unacceptable Violent Conduct what so shock about it I wonder

[daylight]

SAF very angry liao.
he is very lucky that only 4 match banned.

[lyfeforce]

Jackson, this topic was already put to rest. There isn't a need to pursue it any further.

[lyfeforce]

To add on, please do not post something to provoke another person. Be sensible and comment on the situation, how it could have gone down.

It's okay to post your opinions but, like Wryer mentioned, don't make it personal. There is no need to question anyone's motives for posting a thread. This is a football forum, after all. All news should be received amicably, be it favourable to your club or otherwise.

[1920_me]

Step back and take a look at the issue, i feel 4 game ban is too harsh for something that was not part of the game.

The commission found that Bethell conducted himself in a 'disorderly fashion' and that his language 'had been abusive and provocative'.

Chelsea were fined for failing to ensure that their employee conducted himself 'in an orderly fashion and refrained from abusive and provocative conduct and language'.[

Source: Daily Mail


Evra was provoked and reacted and admitted to the mistake. The fine is probably fair, and and it was nothing more than some handbags (i dont think the chelsea dude suffered any injuries).

To take him out of the game for something like this, feels harsh to me. Just like how crazy it was to ban Rio for eight months even when he volunteered to do the hair test for the drugs.

[hiei02]

video here: http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x5c1bp_evra-manchester-united-coup-de-poin_sport

i'm not commenting anymore. 4 matches ban or not, we get on with football. as much as i want to be objective with ppl creating controversial threads, it is quite obvious someone has an agenda against a particular team. LLST.

[lyfeforce]

Step back and take a look at the issue, i feel 4 game ban is too harsh for something that was not part of the game.



Evra was provoked and reacted and admitted to the mistake. The fine is probably fair, and and it was nothing more than some handbags (i dont think the chelsea dude suffered any injuries).

To take him out of the game for something like this, feels harsh to me. Just like how crazy it was to ban Rio for eight months even when he volunteered to do the hair test for the drugs.

The ban was too harsh, no doubt. But he is a professional footballer and as such, is a role model for many kids to look up to. Even if he was provoked, reacting in a physical manner will send the wrong message. Maybe that's the kind of image the FA is trying to uphold.

video here: http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x5c1bp_evra-manchester-united-coup-de-poin_sport

i'm not commenting anymore. 4 matches ban or not, we get on with football. as much as i want to be objective with ppl creating controversial threads, it is quite obvious someone has an agenda against a particular team. LLST.

Yes, the game goes on. Just like life.

[Wryer]

I say again, no more irrelevant posts.

[Asakura]

The ban was too harsh, no doubt. But he is a professional footballer and as such, is a role model for many kids to look up to. Even if he was provoked, reacting in a physical manner will send the wrong message. Maybe that's the kind of image the FA is trying to uphold.



Yes, the game goes on. Just like life.

that's the usual official answer from FA as well. lol anyone who does something wrong face this line almost everytime. it's becoming a template answer. lol

[RVN]

[COLOR="Blue"]What big shock is he talking about Evra deserve to be ban in more matches for fighting ! Unacceptable Violent Conduct what so shock about it I wonder

why did the groundstaff abuse Evra then?

[Asakura]

lets not start another debate who was right, whos wrong. who deserve more punishment, grdsman or player.
bottom line is, fight = ban, fine.
whether evra started it due to racist comments or not, only the people involved will know.
none of us here can firmly say "yes the staff did hurled such remarks" or "evra is just plain violent and sore"
so why bother going into arguement. it will never end.

[lyfeforce]

that's the usual official answer from FA as well. lol anyone who does something wrong face this line almost everytime. it's becoming a template answer. lol

It's a standard PR reply. :s13:

[1920_me]

One thing is for sure, man utd are not letting it go. They are going to take it down to the wire.

[lyfeforce]

One thing is for sure, man utd are not letting it go. They are going to take it down to the wire.

They should. Appeal for a lighter ban.

[Kiwi8]

We are football fans first, then the club fans.

Actually for this, it is not very accurate. Some are biased hardcore club fans first, and rational football fans second. :o

[lyfeforce]

Actually for this, it is not very accurate. Some are biased hardcore club fans first, and rational football fans second. :o

I wish for that to change.

[Kiwi8]

I wish for that to change.

Very hard. :crazy:

[usjag_18]

1) haha great can see o shea play.

[B]2) so sure that man u won't drop any points ? almost did against sunderland already.

3) FA side with Chelsea ? nah FA never do that and Evra admit to all charges that he whack the chelsea groundstaff then what you think the FA should have done then after Evra Admit that he whack that fellow - give him a small fine and ask him to apologise ?? LOL :s13:

4) Chelsea got fine in behalf of the chelsea groundstaff.

Almost? hahaha.... Dun tell me that Chelsea never almost dropped points before... So dun make me laugh... When Chelsea dropped points, where the h3ll are most of Chelsea supporters? At least, we don't avoid making comments on our own thread...
And what's wrong with O'Shea playing?? He might not be No.1 choice but he got his good times... So keep ur own comments to your own player... After all, do u dare to say FA didn't always got something against MAN UTD??? :s8:

[usjag_18]

They should. Appeal for a lighter ban.
I do agreed that a lighter punishment shld be given to Evra too.

[usjag_18]

video here: http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x5c1bp_evra-manchester-united-coup-de-poin_sport

i'm not commenting anymore. 4 matches ban or not, we get on with football. as much as i want to be objective with ppl creating controversial threads, it is quite obvious someone has an agenda against a particular team. LLST.
I think maybe this video is also not completed about what had happened. I got no doubts that Evra deserved a ban but the issue here is the groundstaff definitely also swing his punch towards Evra thru the video. So both sides got stepped on the wrong side of the issue.

However, if Evra got 4-bans and fined, I don't think Chelsea shld be fined any lighter. Because their groundstaffs are allowed to throw punch @ visitor team. Who knows what will they do against some other teams (which they got more hatred like Arsenal or Liverpool) in future?



Cheers'
UJ18

[Jackson Ng Ghim Pheng]

Almost? hahaha.... Dun tell me that Chelsea never almost dropped points before... So dun make me laugh... When Chelsea dropped points, where the h3ll are most of Chelsea supporters? At least, we don't avoid making comments on our own thread...
And what's wrong with O'Shea playing?? He might not be No.1 choice but he got his good times... So keep ur own comments to your own player... After all, do u dare to say FA didn't always got something against MAN UTD??? :s8:

O Shea play good what I never say anything bad about him also really what wrong ?

my Fantasy football team some of them has O Shea of course I am happy to see him playing you are too sensitive.

[1920_me]

Don't Off-Topic. Nothing to say about this Evra Ban, then take your comments elsewhere.

Let's just wait for the appeal, results to be out.

[Asakura]

lame......