Re: Inniss Charged
3According to the ‘Gus , still awaiting ref’s report and Inniss sent off for “ intent “. What the hell offence is that? Must have been sent off for violent conduct surely, how do you prove intent to bite? All very strange or badly interpreted/reported.
Re: Inniss Charged
4I always thought gross misconduct was a term in employment law and in football it was just misconduct.
Re: Inniss Charged
5At the risk of talking bollocks, I suggest that the special disciplinary rules which allow most offences to be punished within the EFL Trophy and not apply to the league need a definition of the worst offences such as biting which are not excused sanction in the league. Gross misconduct may the the name for that.
Re: Inniss Charged
6I'm thinking plain misconduct would override the competition rules, just thinking if it's "on social media" with the wrong wording, it's less likely to be true - yet.
Re: Inniss Charged
9Guessing it's gross misconduct because it's an (alleged) attack which can't in any way be justified within the parameters of the laws of the game in the way, say, a leg break due to a tackle could be. Usual FA (or FAW, whoever is doing this for us nowadays) disciplinary hearing stuff but bigger punishments.G Guest wrote:At the risk of talking bollocks, I suggest that the special disciplinary rules which allow most offences to be punished within the EFL Trophy and not apply to the league need a definition of the worst offences such as biting which are not excused sanction in the league. Gross misconduct may the the name for that.
IIRC stuff like shoving officials comes under this too. It will be a big deal and around 8 matches, I'm expecting.
Last edited by SJG99 on September 13th, 2019, 5:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Inniss Charged
10In two biting cases involving a couple of players we are familiar with the charge was plain misconduct and the bans were eight and ten games.
I suspect "gross" would kick in if a club then fired a player, but that would be Palace's concern IF he is found guilty.
I suspect "gross" would kick in if a club then fired a player, but that would be Palace's concern IF he is found guilty.
Re: Inniss Charged
11That's an interesting point. Who is the employer of a player who is on loan, especially if the club taking the player is also paying wages? To be clear I don't know.George Street-Bridge wrote:In two biting cases involving a couple of players we are familiar with the charge was plain misconduct and the bans were eight and ten games.
I suspect "gross" would kick in if a club then fired a player, but that would be Palace's concern IF he is found guilty.
Re: Inniss Charged
12.Beechwood Boy wrote:Any news? Had until 6o'clock this evening to put in any evidence.
Given that was the case, does anyone know why we are yet to hear anything? Has the hearing been held yet, or a date set? As of this moment is he eligible for selection Sat?
Re: Inniss Charged
13The player is employed by both clubs on different contracts.Stan A. Einstein wrote:That's an interesting point. Who is the employer of a player who is on loan, especially if the club taking the player is also paying wages? To be clear I don't know.George Street-Bridge wrote:In two biting cases involving a couple of players we are familiar with the charge was plain misconduct and the bans were eight and ten games.
I suspect "gross" would kick in if a club then fired a player, but that would be Palace's concern IF he is found guilty.
Re: Inniss Charged
14Apparently we’ve appealed this charge and should hear something this afternoon ....
Admittedly that’s from the ‘Gus so you might want to take it with a pinch of salt
Admittedly that’s from the ‘Gus so you might want to take it with a pinch of salt
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Bristolexile, butlinsamber, flat4, OLDCROMWELLIAN