Patterson, Zungu, Bassey, Mebude and Kinnear - Appeals dismissed, original bans stand - Rangers' reaction to appeal decision in the OP

Bonnyloyal

Bonnyloyal

Well-Known Member
Alleged Parties in Breach: Calvin Bassey, Brian Kinnear, Dapo Mebude, Nathan Patterson, Bongani Zungu (Rangers FC)

Date: 13/14 February 2021

Disciplinary Rules allegedly breached:

Disciplinary Rule 24 - A recognised football body, club, official, Team Official or other member of Team Staff, player, match official or other person under the jurisdiction of the Scottish FA shall be subject to and shall comply with the Articles, the Laws of the Game and the rules, procedures and regulations, bye-laws and Decisions of the Scottish FA.

Disciplinary Rule 77 - A recognised football body, club, official, Team Official, other member of Team Staff, player, match official or other person under the jurisdiction of the Scottish FA shall, at all times, act in the best interests of Association Football. Furthermore such person or body shall not act in any manner which is improper or use any one, or a combination of, violent Conduct, serious foul play, threatening, abusive, indecent or insulting words or behaviour.

Principal hearing date: Thursday, 25 March 2021

Outcome: Suspension of 6 matches applied as follows: 4 matches immediate and 2 matches suspended until End of Season 2020/21.

Determination appealed

Appellate Tribunal Hearing on 20 April 2021

RANGERS notes the outcome of today’s appeal.

We remain disappointed in the result. Furthermore, we believe this outcome highlights the inconsistency of decision making in the Scottish FA’s disciplinary process.

We are cognisant that the approach taken by other football associations across Europe has no resemblance to that of the Scottish FA. We urge the Scottish FA to be open minded to learn from other football authorities.

We now focus on Sunday’s quarter final at Ibrox.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The SFA will look at the bigger picture and won't want to derail Patterson's incredible form prior to the Euros.

Slap on the wrists.
 
AllyRFC said:
Decision upheld with an extra 2 games added for appealing is my bet.
Click to expand...
dh1963 said:
I think we'll get the ban reduced.

No idea why I think that, as the SFA are Rangers hating filth.
Click to expand...
I'm with @dh1963 - the time taken to announce the initial punishment and our subsequent appeal would indicate this case is not as cut and dried as many think.

Ban reduced to two games...



Granted, I have a history of being wrong!
 
Craigie said:
I'm with @dh1963 - the time taken to announce the initial punishment and our subsequent appeal would indicate this case is not as cut and dried as many think.

Ban reduced to two games...



Granted, I have a history of being wrong!
Click to expand...
That would be common sense though, mate!
 
AllyRFC said:
Weve been given extra for appealing before...

These cvnts just make it up as they go along any way.
Click to expand...
There was a rule in place that if you appealed a red card to basically play the system you could have an extra game added - frivolous was the term used by the SFA. I think that rule has been dropped now.

It wouldn't affect this appeal though.
 
Craigie said:
There was a rule in place that if you appealed a red card to basically play the system you could have an extra game added - frivolous was the term used by the SFA. I think that rule has been dropped now.

It wouldn't affect this appeal though.
Click to expand...
Knew i had seen it somewhere! My post was a bit tongue in cheek but i wouldnt put anything past them.
 
Think it might go to 3+3, which it possibly should have been in the first place. Shouldnt have been anything based on Dubai shambles but most would have taken a 3 game ban I assume
 
AllyRFC said:
Weve been given extra for appealing before...

These cvnts just make it up as they go along any way.
Click to expand...
That rule was removed a while back and can only think of one occasion where it was added to, possibly bougie (which shows how far back you're going).

We need to get out the mindset as a support that they'll just do what they want to us. The victim tag doesn't fit the champions.
 
ALittleBitOfTheBubbly said:
That rule was removed a while back and can only think of one occasion where it was added to, possibly bougie (which shows how far back you're going).

We need to get out the mindset as a support that they'll just do what they want to us. The victim tag doesn't fit the champions.
Click to expand...
Chill out, dude. I wasnt being completely serious ffs.
 
I don't know why we are not throwing Dubai back in their faces Celtic players are clearly caught not following their rules, and how can Duffy can fly home himself and worse still play in a match. This mob wouldn't be so mute about in fact they actually have the gall to question our players.
 
ALittleBitOfTheBubbly said:
That rule was removed a while back and can only think of one occasion where it was added to, possibly bougie (which shows how far back you're going).

We need to get out the mindset as a support that they'll just do what they want to us. The victim tag doesn't fit the champions.
Click to expand...
They have done so in the recent past.
 
The SFA have been making it up as they have been going along. Its been an absolute farce.Good luck to the lads.
 
Last edited:
ItsInTheNet said:
The SFA have been making it us as they have been going along. Its been an absolute farce.Good luck to the lads.
Click to expand...
As far as I know the English FA have not dealt with any players who broke the rules like ours does anyone know if this is true.
 
Should be thrown out. SFA didn't do nothing about them going to Dubai. Pointless banning a young promising player weeks after the incident took place
 
Valley Bluenose said:
I think the punishment for a 'frivolous' Appeal is a fine for the Club. Not sure they will go that far but I don't expect the Appeal to succeed.
Click to expand...
I remember additional match bans being added before, but posters above have said thats been done a way with now. Rightly so as well.

I definitely cant see us being successful in our appeal though. I hope im wrong!
 
AllyRFC said:
I remember additional match bans being added before, but posters above have said thats been done a way with now. Rightly so as well.

I definitely cant see us being successful in our appeal though. I hope im wrong!
Click to expand...
Actually I was wrong it would appear. From the Judicial Panel Protocol:

15.9 Frivolous appeals and submissions

15.9.1 Where a Tribunal considers an appeal, it shall be open to the Tribunal to also consider whether:

15.9.1.1 The individual bringing the appeal had no prospect of success;

15.9.1.2 The appeal is considered by the Tribunal to have been an abuse of process or a delaying tactic for the sanction originally imposed;

and/or

15.9.1.3 The appeal is considered by the Tribunal to have been a frivolous claim.

15.9.2 If Appeals Proceedings are considered by the Tribunal to fall within the parameters of Paragraph 15.9.1, an additional sanction may be imposed.
 
Think the season is done for these lads unfortunately. Cant see them decreasing it, even though the scenario with JJ and GE is totally different.
 
Gerrard alluded yesterday to 'Paterson being back before the end of the season'

Keevins picked up on it and reckons Gerrard already knows the length of the ban?????

The reality is, the entire process needs reviewed.
 
HarryBosch said:
Gerrard alluded yesterday to 'Paterson being back before the end of the season'

Keevins picked up on it and reckons Gerrard already knows the length of the ban?????

The reality is, the entire process needs reviewed.
Click to expand...
We've 4 League games and potentially 3 Cup-ties to play. So Patterson will, indeed, be available before the end of the season. Shug is talking shite, therefore.
 
Bear all said:
I don't know why we are not throwing Dubai back in their faces Celtic players are clearly caught not following their rules, and how can Duffy can fly home himself and worse still play in a match. This mob wouldn't be so mute about in fact they actually have the gall to question our players.
Click to expand...
We have done clearly
 
HarryBosch said:
Gerrard alluded yesterday to 'Paterson being back before the end of the season'

Keevins picked up on it and reckons Gerrard already knows the length of the ban?????

The reality is, the entire process needs reviewed.
Click to expand...
Keevins made no mention of the number of games merely that Gerrard said he'd be back for the end of the seasons and the nasally one highlighted that a ban was forthcoming.
 
Craigie said:
I'm with @dh1963 - the time taken to announce the initial punishment and our subsequent appeal would indicate this case is not as cut and dried as many think.

Ban reduced to two games...



Granted, I have a history of being wrong!
Click to expand...
2 game ban would mean he could play against the tims for a 3rd time . That would be worth it alone. Obviously tav is back but they will be seething
 
I reckon the 2 suspended games will be changed and they'll serve the full 6 ban.

They'll be doing all they can to try and stop the double.
 
Bear all said:
When was this the so Club asked why there was no case to answer for breaking rules in Dubai I’m unaware of this any link to it please .
Click to expand...
Gerrard press conference from a week or two back.

Also the Athletic claimed a key part of the defence was Rangers raising the Dubai question. Our club isn’t stupid, we will have went in lawyered up
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Latest posts

Back
Top