Carlisle striker charged with successful deception of ref....

[sidders]

Have you seen it?

From the angle it looks suspiciously like he dived but he didn't appeal for a penalty and appeared to carry on. I doubt he will be found unanimously guilty.

He already has been found unanimously guilty - that's why he was charged!

[macse15]

He already has been found unanimously guilty - that's why he was charged!

No he hasnt. You cant be found guilty of something you havent been charged with

[Oldstripy]

No he hasnt. You cant be found guilty of something you havent been charged with

First two sentences of the article.

Carlisle United's Shaun Miller is the first player to be charged by the Football Association since simulation laws were introduced in May.

Miller, 30, is charged with "successful deception of a match official", after an alleged "clear act of simulation" against Wycombe on Tuesday.

I think we can take it that he has been charged.

Carlisle scored with the penalty.

[macse15]

First two sentences of the article.

Carlisle United's Shaun Miller is the first player to be charged by the Football Association since simulation laws were introduced in May.

Miller, 30, is charged with "successful deception of a match official", after an alleged "clear act of simulation" against Wycombe on Tuesday.

I think we can take it that he has been charged.

Carlisle scored with the penalty.

I know;That wasnt my point - Sidders was saying he had been found guilty unanimously without being charged which I stated was not possible

[Elite_Pie]

I know;That wasnt my point - Sidders was saying he had been found guilty unanimously without being charged which I stated was not possible

Difficult one, as the article says:

"Incidents which suggest a match official has been deceived by an act of simulation are referred to a panel consisting of one ex-match official, one ex-manager and one ex-player. Each panel member will be asked to review all available video footage independently of one another to determine whether they consider it was an offence of 'successful deception of a match official'. Only in circumstances where the panel are unanimous would the FA issue a charge."

That suggests all 3 panel members did indeed see him as being guilty in order for the charge to be issued. The player now has to accept the charge or appeal against it. It's a bit difficult to see how an appeal could succeed when 3 panel members appear to have already independently and unanimously decided he dived. It will be interesting to see if an appeal is lodged by the 6pm deadline.

[i961pie]

Difficult one, as the article says:

"Incidents which suggest a match official has been deceived by an act of simulation are referred to a panel consisting of one ex-match official, one ex-manager and one ex-player. Each panel member will be asked to review all available video footage independently of one another to determine whether they consider it was an offence of 'successful deception of a match official'. Only in circumstances where the panel are unanimous would the FA issue a charge."

That suggests all 3 panel members did indeed see him as being guilty in order for the charge to be issued. The player now has to accept the charge or appeal against it. It's a bit difficult to see how an appeal could succeed when 3 panel members appear to have already independently and unanimously decided he dived. It will be interesting to see if an appeal is lodged by the 6pm deadline.

What about doing the same to a player rolling on the ground holding his face when there as been minimal contact or none at all?
He is cheating and trying to get an opponent sent off, the Rivaldo incident springs to mind.

[sidders]

No he hasnt. You cant be found guilty of something you havent been charged with

FROM SWALE'S ORIGINAL POST:

"Each panel member will be asked to review all available video footage independently of one another to determine whether they consider it was an offence of 'successful deception of a match official'.

"Only in circumstances where the panel are unanimous would the FA issue a charge."

I believe the panel met those circumstances thus the player was charged. Now will come the 'trial'. Where is the problem, Macse?

[macse15]

FROM SWALE'S ORIGINAL POST:

"Each panel member will be asked to review all available video footage independently of one another to determine whether they consider it was an offence of 'successful deception of a match official'.

"Only in circumstances where the panel are unanimous would the FA issue a charge."

I believe the panel met those circumstances thus the player was charged. Now will come the 'trial'. Where is the problem, Macse?

The "panel" would be the equivalent of the CPS who decide whether there is a good chance of a successful prosecution. They do not decide whether the accused is guilty

[GranthamPie]

Praps someone should report the "deception" of Paul Farman, the Lincoln City goalkeeper?

[tarquinbeech]

I cannot see why each side cannot have one appeal each against a serious decision.....there are enough tv cameras now at every game....penalties, sendings-off, balls kicked off the line and serious foul-play off the ball (Gazza's elbow in Harding's face springs to mind)

You get one appeal per game, the ref, linesmen and 4th official have a tv monitor on the touchline....and the decision can only be reversed if there is a genuine reason to overturn it....it works in baseball