Club statement regarding the incident involving Marcus Martin

[SuperCooper]

Club statement regarding the incident involving Marcus Martin during the home fixture against Tavistock on Tuesday 26th April. 

 

Following the unsavoury events that occurred during the game on Tuesday night following the dismissal of Marcus Martin, the club would like to place on record that it is does not condone such behaviour in the game in any way. Marcus Martin has now been suspended by the club with immediate effect and we will be working with The FA and SWPL very closely while a full investigation is carried out. 

The club would also like to apologise publicly to all in attendance at the game, The FA, The SWPL and also to the match referee Stuart Kane who is a well respected match official throughout Cornwall & Devon. 

 

No further comment will be made at this time 

 

Best Wishes

James Hutchings

Chairman AFC St Austell

[rocky170267]

Excellent Statement and how very professional of the club to deal with this quickly. People will over react but these things sadly do occur. Plenty of clubs have players very capable of losing it on occasions and that is modern football I'm afraid. St Austell have to move on quickly and get the league winners trophy in the bag and then sort it out with Marcus. Who is a very nice lad normally

[Dave Deacon]

Cornwall FA Statement

AFC St Austell v Tavistock AFC – Tuesday 26^th April 2016

Following the receipt of reports from the match officials at a game between AFC St Austell and Tavistock AFC on Tuesday 26^th April 2016. Cornwall FA have issued a charge against Marcus Martin of AFC St Austell for an alleged breach of FA Rule E3 – Improper Conduct against a Match Official (Including physical contact/ violent conduct/and threatening and/or abusive language behaviour)

Mr Martin has been suspended from all football and football activities with immediate effect. AFC St Austell and Mr Martin have two weeks to respond to the charge.

[Dave Deacon]

I think this is the one:-

(1) A Participant shall at all times act in the best interests of the game and shall not act in any manner which is improper or brings the game into disrepute or use any one, or a combination of, violent conduct, serious foul play, threatening, abusive, indecent or insulting words or behaviour.

(2) A breach of Rule E3 (1) is an “Aggravated Breach” where it includes a reference, whether express or implied, to any one or more of the following :- ethnic origin, colour, race, nationality, religion or belief, gender, gender reassignment, sexual orientation or disability.

(3) Subject to sub-paragraphs E3(4) -E3(6) below – (i) Where a Participant commits an Aggravated Breach of Rule E3(1) for the first time, a Regulatory Commission shall impose an immediate suspension of at least five matches on that Participant. The Regulatory Commission may increase this suspension depending on any additional aggravating factors present. (ii) Where a Participant commits a second or further Aggravated Breach of Rule E3(1), a Regulatory Commission shall impose an immediate suspension of more than five matches, taking into consideration an entry point of an immediate suspension of ten matches, and any aggravating or mitigating factors present.

(4) Where an Aggravated Breach of Rule E3(1) is committed – (i) By a Participant for whom a match-based suspension would be inappropriate due only to that Participant’s particular role in football; or (ii) In writing only; or (iii) Via the use of any communication device, public communication network or broadcast media only; or (iv) By reference only to nationality, a Regulatory Commission will not be bound to impose an immediate suspension of at least five matches for a first such breach, or of more than five matches for a second or further such breach. Instead the Regulatory Commission may impose any sanction that it considers appropriate, taking into account any aggravating or mitigating factors present. For the avoidance of doubt and without limitation, E3(4)(i) shall not apply to a Manager, coach or Player.

(5) (i) Where in youth football a Player aged 12 – 15 inclusive commits an Aggravated Breach of Rule E3(1) for the first time, a Regulatory Commission shall impose a suspension of at least five matches. The Regulatory Commission may increase this suspension depending on any additional aggravating factors present. A minimum of one match shall come into effect immediately and any remainder of the suspension shall be suspended on such terms and for such period as the Regulatory Commission considers appropriate. (ii) Where a second or further Aggravated Breach of Rule E3(1) is committed in youth football by a Player aged 12 – 15 inclusive, a Regulatory Commission shall impose an immediate suspension of more than five matches, taking into consideration an entry point of an immediate suspension of ten matches, and any aggravating or mitigating factors present.

(6) Where an Aggravated Breach of Rule E3(1) is committed in youth football by a Player aged under 12, no disciplinary charge will be brought. The primary aim in such cases will be education.

(7) Where two or more Participants from a Club commit any Aggravated Breach of Rule E3(1) in any twelve month period, regardless of whether any such breach falls within sub-paragraph E3(4), the Club itself will be liable to a sanction imposed by a Regulatory Commission. The Regulatory Commission may impose any sanction that it considers appropriate, taking into account any aggravating or mitigating factors present. For the purpose of this Rule, a decision of a Regulatory Commission that a Participant has committed an Aggravated Breach of Rule E3(1) will be conclusive evidence of that fact, unless that decision is or may be subject to appeal in accordance with FA Rules or regulations.

(8) A Regulatory Commission may impose a financial penalty or any other sanction that it considers appropriate in respect of an Aggravated Breach of Rule E3(1) whether or not it has imposed a suspension in respect of the same breach.

(9) A Participant who commits an Aggravated Breach of Rule E3(1) will be subject to an education programme, the details of which will be provided to the Participant by The Association.

[rocky170267]

Surely now it's a matter for the Club and Player so we should respect that and not comment further. A lot of opinions and comments on this site will surely not help the matter. A usually very quiet player off the pitch had a very bad evening and needs to put this behind him. What's done is done. He must regret it and will be hurting right now. Many players have been in this situation before and it's part of life. I guess lessons will be learned..

[cornishcasual]

6 minutes ago, rocky170267 said:

Surely now it's a matter for the Club and Player so we should respect that and not comment further. A lot of opinions and comments on this site will surely not help the matter. A usually very quiet player off the pitch had a very bad evening and needs to put this behind him. What's done is done. He must regret it and will be hurting right now. Many players have been in this situation before and it's part of life. I guess lessons will be learned..

Disagree this is a forum for discussions so why cant this be discussed further? The club and player should be fined for this. It sounds as if you have sympathy for the player? (he must be hurting right now) What about the official?  

[Bruegel the Elder]

Rocky, what he did, he did very publicly, witnessed by a large crowd, it is of public interest and in the public domain. The players conduct and previous behaviour both on and off the pitch have been clearly documented on this forum over the last fifteen hours it doesn't come over as quiet or peaceable.

As for him hurting, not half as much as his victim I imagine!

[Bruegel the Elder]

All over BBC Points West this lunchtime, Kevin Marriat damning, there's no hiding it under the carpet now!

[Dave Deacon]

I know I shall be chastised for this, but it's a shame the assistant referee got it wrong in the first place! Could have all been avoided!

Did anyone listen to some of those callers in on BBC Radio Cornwall? Peter from Launceston, who did I hear correct is an assistant to Gary Jeffery (?), who didn't even get the referee's name correct; and the rugby guys gloating!  

[rocky170267]

I can think of a lot of other players with a short fuse, there's two or three at Bodmin, some at Parkway,some at Ivybridge, A few at Elburton , Saltash and definitely Launceston.  And let's face it probably at every club. I do not condone what happened in any way. But I am convinced that there is a number of people commenting because this happened at Saint Austell !!!  So if something kicks off tonight at Bodmin (rather likely) then I would expect a full report on the site tomorrow. I know this involves a referee but you don't hear much when it involves player on opposite teams. 

[A.Bystander]

No room for this in the game:-

"sine die"

Simple!!

[pastyman]

33 minutes ago, rocky170267 said:

I can think of a lot of other players with a short fuse, there's two or three at Bodmin, some at Parkway,some at Ivybridge, A few at Elburton , Saltash and definitely Launceston.  And let's face it probably at every club. I do not condone what happened in any way. But I am convinced that there is a number of people commenting because this happened at Saint Austell !!!  So if something kicks off tonight at Bodmin (rather likely) then I would expect a full report on the site tomorrow. I know this involves a referee but you don't hear much when it involves player on opposite teams. 

Lets not single out just a few clubs here. Most clubs have a few with a "short fuse". But what Mr Marcus Martin has done is totally not acceptable and should mean a life time ban.

[Tribute]

Not sure how old Marcus is but saying ' sine die ' for this offence is rubbish . 40yr old does it in his last season equates to hardly any punishment , whereas a 19 yr old equates to over a 20 yr + ban . Face to face apology supervised by club and FA  , fine donated to a charity of the refs choice and 12 month ban . Would I want someone to be banned for life for what actually happened if done to me ?    NO . 

[Dave Deacon]

10 minutes ago, Tribute said:

Not sure how old Marcus is

31 I think

[TheolderIgetthebetterIwas]

5 hours ago, Tribute said:

Not sure how old Marcus is but saying ' sine die ' for this offence is rubbish . 40yr old does it in his last season equates to hardly any punishment , whereas a 19 yr old equates to over a 20 yr + ban . Face to face apology supervised by club and FA  , fine donated to a charity of the refs choice and 12 month ban . Would I want someone to be banned for life for what actually happened if done to me ?    NO . 

I bleddy well would.

6 hours ago, rocky170267 said:

I can think of a lot of other players with a short fuse, there's two or three at Bodmin, some at Parkway,some at Ivybridge, A few at Elburton , Saltash and definitely Launceston.  And let's face it probably at every club. I do not condone what happened in any way. But I am convinced that there is a number of people commenting because this happened at Saint Austell !!!  So if something kicks off tonight at Bodmin (rather likely) then I would expect a full report on the site tomorrow. I know this involves a referee but you don't hear much when it involves player on opposite teams. 

We're picking on St Austell - crap.

We're commenting on the most distasteful of incidents - NOT St Austell - idiot.

[Tribute]

Obviously there's a difference between us 

[TheolderIgetthebetterIwas]

51 minutes ago, Tribute said:

Obviously there's a difference between us 

Yes - I'm sensible.

[Tribute]

10 minutes ago, TheolderIgetthebetterIwas said:

Yes - I'm sensible.

Hahaha. That's the funniest thing I've seen on here for a long time . 

[TheolderIgetthebetterIwas]

5 minutes ago, Tribute said:

Hahaha. That's the funniest thing I've seen on here for a long time . 

Now try laughing at yourself - everyone else is.

[Tribute]

9 hours ago, TheolderIgetthebetterIwas said:

Now try laughing at yourself - everyone else is.

Now that is the worse come back for a long time !! Now you know not only what happens when your not there , you know what everyone are doing ! What are you clairvoyant ????

[B Manning]

Tribute, there is an old saying, "If you cant do the time dont do the crime". 

[Ivory Toast]

After watching Saltash's humiliation on Monday, the events at Poltair on Tuesday and then the visit of Plymouth Parkway last night to Priory Park I have to say what an enjoyable match it was. Both teams played excellent football at times, and to be fair Parkway were probably the better side on the night. Both teams have strong characters within their ranks and NO CARDS SHOWN, last night was a credit to the SWPL. Four games to go ...which way will it go

[a little bit of a dinho]

On 27/04/2016 at 10:27, rocky170267 said:

Excellent Statement and how very professional of the club to deal with this quickly. People will over react but these things sadly do occur. Plenty of clubs have players very capable of losing it on occasions and that is modern football I'm afraid. St Austell have to move on quickly and get the league winners trophy in the bag and then sort it out with Marcus. Who is a very nice lad normally

Yes we should praise those people for writing words on a forum to cover their player's ass after their player allegedly assaulted a match official, very professional indeed! 

Yes "these things" do occur, it is sad and in the real world people are punished accordingly.

Yes plenty of players could lose it, anybody could conceivably do anything. The difference is the vast majority of people exercise a bit of self control.

No that is not modern football. Accepting this as an unavoidable side effect of the game moving forward is completely ignorant and is just a phrase to diminish the responsibility of an individual/club that you seem to have a vested interest in. 

No the priority is not to get the league winner's trophy in the bag and deal with this afterwards as if it is of secondary importance.

On 27/04/2016 at 13:12, rocky170267 said:

Surely now it's a matter for the Club and Player so we should respect that and not comment further. A lot of opinions and comments on this site will surely not help the matter. A usually very quiet player off the pitch had a very bad evening and needs to put this behind him. What's done is done. He must regret it and will be hurting right now. Many players have been in this situation before and it's part of life. I guess lessons will be learned..

Don't even know where to start with this pile of....

Easily the most ignorant posts I have ever read on these forums. Take a minute to stop and think critically about how his actions have affected the referee, his own team, the opposition and anyone forced to watch. 

[ECPL]

  The problem for Martin has escalated as according to the BBC Text service the police are asking for witnesses to contact them.   It is a tragedy all round as I am sure Martin is remorseful.  Unfortunately it is to late, a moment of madness and not only is his playing career seemingly over but he now faces a criminal enquiry.  I suggest people should now let the case  be dealt with in its normal way.   One thing I will comment on is the totally inappropriate comment made by Dave Deacon is that: 'it's a shame the assistant referee got it wrong in the first place! Could have all been avoided'   I am sorry but that is a completely unacceptable comment.  As a player and a supporter I would have loved to have knocked the block off officials who got it wrong.  I didn't, and while refereeing I too at times suffered the wrath of players and fans for making a possible wrong decision and yes they would have liked to have knocked my block off.  BUT THEY DIDN'T.  And this is the whole point irrespective of a decision being made which someone disagrees with, it is the responsibility of the player in whatever sport to show signs of restraint.  But to say the linesman caused the situation is both infantile and incorrect and needs correcting.   

[Dave Deacon]

Sorry ECPL as one that witnessed the incident first hand, I have indeed stated that the situation could have so easily been avoided. The challenge by Chapman on the Tavistock player was a good one and everyone around where I was standing, and like me with a good view of the tackle, agreed the same that it was never a penalty. Unfortunately the assistant referee saw it differently.

When it comes to what happened afterwards, I have already agreed, within minutes of the incident, with contributors on Twitter that it was an absolutely stupid reaction. Indeed there's no place in football or society for this sort of thing and although Marcus regretted it the moment he was off the pitch, it's now up to the CCFA to deal appropriately with the matter. As for the police getting involved, shall we do likewise every match that we hear foul and abusive language? What's the procedure for that?

I'm also pleased to see that Stuart Kane has commented favourably on his Facebook page and is continuing with refereeing. To quote "Guys I'd just like to say thank you for all the messages of support and assistance. I am overwhelmed by all the help and support offered. I am okay and will be back on the field of play Saturday. Not going to let an incident like this stop me doing something I love doing and have worked extremely hard for. Thanks again guys."

[Smiler]

Apart from un-sporting behaviour on a football pitch I didn't realise that foul and abusive language was against the law

[davegrose]

Didn't any one get any pictures?

 

[John Solomon]

Dave, would you say the same thing if a player assaulted a teammate if he missed a penalty, or scored an own goal, or made any of the numerous other mistakes that players make every single game? I'm sure that you weren't trying to defend the player, but that is how it comes across, by appearing to blame an assistant for what you thought was a mistake. Bear in mind that he had a different angle on the incident, and clearly thought that it was a foul.

[RAPPO]

Think Dave is just giving his opinion on the matter which he is entitled to more than anyone seeing he started this forum that we all enjoy!!! Just said it could have been avoided, he's not condoning what went on afterwards which I'm sure we all agree should never happen on a football pitch!!! Surely that's what the forum is all about, our individual opinions? Think enough has been said, well done to Mr Kane for not letting the incident stop him doing something he really enjoys, well done to St.Austell who acted quickly on the matter internally, let's let the appropriate authorities take the matter over from here and I'm sure they will take whatever action is warranted. Let's get on with the football at an important stage of the season. ⚽️

[Mike Odgers]

I think I heard Stuart Kane is appointed for the Falmouth v Torpoint game on Saturday.

Sounds like Stuart Kane has a strong character-jusy the remedy for a good referee-well done

[SteveM]

On 27/04/2016 at 13:44, Dave Deacon said:

I know I shall be chastised for this, but it's a shame the player didn't just respect the referee's decision and left the field of play quietly like a grown up! Could have all been avoided!

FTFY.

[Dave Deacon]

37 minutes ago, djs said:

Dave, would you say the same thing if a player assaulted a teammate if he missed a penalty, or scored an own goal, or made any of the numerous other mistakes that players make every single game? I'm sure that you weren't trying to defend the player, but that is how it comes across, by appearing to blame an assistant for what you thought was a mistake. Bear in mind that he had a different angle on the incident, and clearly thought that it was a foul.

I've played in a side where two of my teammates were sent off for fighting each other and left us with 9 players for the rest of the match! They were absolutely stupid and deserved to be sent off and we told them so afterwards!

[Bruegel the Elder]

1 hour ago, SteveM said:

FTFY.

Sorry, am old and (very) decrepit, could one of you groovy young fellas translate please. Yes, I'm talking to you Older!

[SteveM]

Fixed That For You.

[Bruegel the Elder]

4 minutes ago, SteveM said:

Fixed That For You.

Thank-you very much Steve. I'm none the wiser!

[TheolderIgetthebetterIwas]

45 minutes ago, Bruegel the Elder said:

Thank-you very much Steve. I'm none the wiser!

And neither am I

[albert]

4 hours ago, Smiler said:

Apart from un-sporting behaviour on a football pitch I didn't realise that foul and abusive language was against the law

Section 5 of the Public order act. Should be employed more often

[ECPL]

Of course Dave Deacon is never wrong.  But of course it is his web site.  So no apology to the officials then for saying  but it's a shame the assistant referee got it wrong in the first place! Could have all been avoided!   Disgusting comment.   I expect a wriggle reply but no apology so whats the point in even discussing it further.  Who cares if you were at the match or all your mates said the decision was wrong, that is no excuse for your comments and you should be ashamed of yourself.  I have often been critical of match officials on this site but I draw the line of accusing them of preempting such a disgusting response.  

[Dave Deacon]

16 minutes ago, ECPL said:

Of course Dave Deacon is never wrong.  But of course it is his web site.  So no apology to the officials then for saying  but it's a shame the assistant referee got it wrong in the first place! Could have all been avoided!   Disgusting comment.   I expect a wriggle reply but no apology so whats the point in even discussing it further.  Who cares if you were at the match or all your mates said the decision was wrong, that is no excuse for your comments and you should be ashamed of yourself.  I have often been critical of match officials on this site but I draw the line of accusing them of preempting such a disgusting response.  

As someone stated - it's not a case of being right or wrong - it's my opinion, and I stand by it and that is that the assistant referee should not have flagged for a penalty. It happens that officials make mistakes, the same as players do and even myself and you!

By the way, technically this forum (not a website) is in Richard Chown's name.

[Super sub 10]

Has anyone actually thought the ref was going to give the penalty anyway and went to speak to the assistant to confirm it was a pen and not that the Tavi forward was offside ? It seems people are quick to jump on the bandwagon and look to blame others when the only culprit in this is the player himself no matter how remorseful he is now. Hopefully the relevant authorities will dish out a punishment which reflects the seriousness of the incident 

[A Fan]

33 minutes ago, Dave Deacon said:

As someone stated - it's not a case of being right or wrong - it's my opinion, and I stand by it and that is that the assistant referee should not have flagged for a penalty. It happens that officials make mistakes, the same as players do and even myself and you!

By the way, technically this forum (not a website) is in Richard Chown's name.

I must say that I totally agree with Dave Deacons comment in that if the original decision was given correctly nothing further would have happened! That is not to comdem what happened but to point out that there was a reaction ( WRONG ) to a WRONG decision! As for there being a police investigation, well every game probably has a tackle with more intent to damage than what actually happened! Perhaps the answer to everything is to have the Police referee every game in the country! As far as I know the referee was not injured, and the media hype that has been created by a certain currently unemployed 'sports journalist' is neither welcome or justified. What was done was WRONG! let football sort it out!

 

[MOUNTAINEER]

I will not comment on the incident, I was not there - I have read the postings with interest and think some responses (Police etc) are over the top - The authorities will approach this as something they HAVE TO BE SEEN to be taking the most severe action because of public opinion expressed here and elsewhere, if it were me I would fear about receiving a fair hearing, I know that sounds wrong and yes if you do the crime you pay the fine but sine die would be over the top Di Canio's case was worse because of fascism.  He only got an 11 match ban from the FOOTBALL ASSOCIATION he didn't lose his right to earn a living, Using the FA's Di Canio punishment as a yardstick perhaps a six match ban for Marcus would be in line with that punishment.

Paolo Di Canio (born 9 July 1968) is an Italian football manager and former professional footballer. During his playing career he made over 500 league appearances and ... by controversy: he received an eleven-match ban in 1998 for pushing a referee and attracted negative publicity over his self allegiance to fascism.

One thing I thought was disgusting was the story in the Plymouth Herald newspaper when they mentioned a player by name and referred to him as an ex convict when all he was doing was attempting to calm Marcus down, to refer to his past experiences was wrong, there must be privacy rules to protect those who no longer live outside the law. Gutter Journalism.

[Tribute]

9 hours ago, Super sub 10 said:

Has anyone actually thought the ref was going to give the penalty anyway and went to speak to the assistant to confirm it was a pen and not that the Tavi forward was offside ? It seems people are quick to jump on the bandwagon and look to blame others when the only culprit in this is the player himself no matter how remorseful he is now. Hopefully the relevant authorities will dish out a punishment which reflects the seriousness of the incident 

Another one not at the game !  " Ref waved play on " ,it was the assistant who wrongly gave it . Last thing on this for me , I do not know Marcus and have never ever spoken to him . He deserves a long ban and a hefty fine cause there is no place for this is any sport ! But those jumping on the band wagon saying banned for life and prison sentence who were not even there !!!  Let's hope A member of your family don't ever do something wrong that they regret cause I'm sure you will be demanding prison as a minimum ! 

Said it before but will say it again , well done to the ref , total respect with the way you have handled the situation and the after affects. Look forward to seeing you take charge soon .

[Guest]

20 minutes ago, Tribute said:

banned for life and prison sentence

I wasn't there either. I do not care about the referees decision not to award a penalty. I do not care about the assistant referee flagging for a penalty. These matters are irrelevant. Yes they may have played a part in the (build up to the) incident... But they are irrelevant in the grand scheme of things. As soon as you lay your hands on someone in an aggressive manner, this becomes assault.

A match official was assaulted. Fact. Can you be imprisoned (or have a suspended sentence) for assault? Yes, again fact! Those shouting prison, it won't get to that. But, you bring family into this.. Lets flip it over. What if a member of your family was assaulted (and humiliated) like that? Wouldn't you think the attacker deserved a custodial sentence of some sort? I know I would. 

Should he be banned for life? Well, I'm not judge nor jury but with abuse on officials a big priority on the FA's agenda at the moment due to an increasing number of incidents, now is their time to impose a strict punishment, which in turn hopefully becomes a deterrent.

You may or may not agree with what's been said on this thread, alot of people are in disagreement about alot of things on here. But one thing that is agreed by all (Except Mr Weasel, because the ref "deserved it") is that this player cannot get away with assaulting a referee. It just isn't on. 

As a fan of football in general but not of any specific team, I would find it harsh if St Austell were to lose their points or get fined. I don't think anyone at the club told Mr Martin to act how he did. A moment of madness that the club couldn't have predicted nor do anything about. To punish them would be harsh, but then there are rules in place "failure to control..." etc that have to be considered.

 

We'll all just have to wait and see what happens. All I care about is whether this incident has deterred any referees or future referees from picking up the whistle!

[a little bit of a dinho]

2 hours ago, Tribute said:

Another one not at the game !

But those jumping on the band wagon saying banned for life and prison sentence who were not even there !!!  Let's hope A member of your family don't ever do something wrong that they regret cause I'm sure you will be demanding prison as a minimum ! 

You do not have to be present at an event to have an informed opinion or even a stake in the situation. For example, the many referees in Cornwall who were not present have an interest/stake in this situation as the events and outcome have an impact on them.

The Police have an interest as they have a duty to uphold the law and respond to events that have an impact on the public, both materially and emotionally. If there were a few hundred people watching and some of them were upset by being forced to watch the incident then the Police have a duty to them. By denying this fact people are essentially rejecting the values and systems of law/society that we all benefit from every day to suit your own interests in this one isolated event which is what I find incredibly ignorant. I'm in no position to make a judgement on how the Police should deal with it, I'm sure they will deal with it appropriately. However, denying that a physical assault is worthy of Police involvement is absurd and purely on the basis that it occurred on a Football pitch.The law still applies on Football pitches. 

The decision to award a penalty has no bearing on this situation. Focusing on Dave Deacon's comment distracts from the actual issue. 

I'm not on the bandwagon for lynching the player but what annoys me the most are some of the reactions on this forum from people trying to downplay the situation and diminish the player's responsibility. In fact, these reactions underline the fact that the FA need to set a precedent by administering a much harsher than normal punishment for people to fully appreciate the seriousness of the situation, the irony  

 

[ECPL]

Wriggle, wriggle.  So you agree your attack on the linesman is an opinion.  Oh dear nice to see the lack of support for the officials.  no apology then.  I think Super sub 10 has hit the nail on the head.    .

[Richard Rundle]

From reading the above accounts (and no one seems to differ that much in relation to the most pertinent matter (i.e. the actions of the player towards the referee), I think a "sine die" suspension is inevitable, with at least a couple of years before the case is reviewed.

[Olimar]

1 hour ago, ECPL said:

Wriggle, wriggle.  So you agree your attack on the linesman is an opinion.  Oh dear nice to see the lack of support for the officials.  no apology then.  I think Super sub 10 has hit the nail on the head.    .

Get off your high horse ECPL. It's not an attack on the linesman. He simply stated that he thinks he made a mistake in the first instance. Take that sentence in the context that it is intended and nothing more. 

[Sticker Forever]

Yeah agree, don't know about an attack on a referee, seems ECPL is having a personal attack on Dave!!!?? Just my "opinion" though!!!  ?  "Wriggling" off to make the kids tea. ?

[TheolderIgetthebetterIwas]

Assault the referee - banned for life - end of for me.