13.3 Fast Track Notices of Complaint may be raised alleging a breach of Disciplinary Rule 200 where an Alleged Party in Breach has committed any one of the sending off offences of serious foul play, violent conduct, or spitting and the act alleged to constitute the sending off offence was “not seen” by any of the match officials at the time that it was committed.
13.3.1 For the purposes of Disciplinary Rule 200 the act alleged to constitute the sending off offence is deemed to be “not seen”, subject to the terms of 13.3.3 below, where no part of the act alleged to constitute the sending off offence was seen by any of the match officials at the time that it occurred.
13.3.2 However where the Compliance Officer obtains written evidence from each of the match officials that no part of the act alleged to constitute the sending off offence was seen at the time that it occurred, there shall be a rebuttable presumption that the act that is alleged to constitute the sending off offence was “not seen”.
13.3.3 Notwithstanding 13.3.1 a Fast Track Notice of Complaint may be raised by the Compliance Officer in respect of serious foul play and violent conduct where some part of the act alleged to constitute the sending off offence was seen by one or more of the match officials, provided that:
13.3.3.1 the serious foul play and/or violent conduct was exceptional in nature; and
13.3.3.2 that the part of the act by the Alleged Party in Breach that renders it as exceptional was not seen by any of the match officials.
13.3.4 An act of serious foul play will be rendered as exceptional, for the purposes of 13.3.3.1, where there is evidence that one or more of the following were features of the act:
13.3.4.1 the level of excessive force used was very high; and/or
13.3.4.2 there was malice used in making the challenge and/or that there was an intent to injure; and/or
13.3.4.3 the level of endangerment of safety was very high; and/or
13.3.4.4 significant injury occurred as a consequence of the challenge.
13.3.5 An act of violent conduct will be rendered as exceptional, for the purposes of 13.3.3.1, where there is evidence that one or more of the following were features of the act:
13.3.5.1 the level of excessive force used was very high; and/or
13.3.5.2 brutality was used; and/or
13.3.5.3 significant injury occurred as a consequence of the act.
13.4 Fast Track Notices of Complaint may be raised alleging a breach of Disciplinary Rule 201 where an Alleged Party in Breach has committed an act of simulation which caused a match official to make an incorrect decision and/or support an error of judgment so that an Alleged Party in Breach’s team obtained a Substantial Advantage.
13.4.1 To prove that Disciplinary Rule 201 has been breached the Compliance Officer shall require to show on the balance of probabilities that a clear act of simulation was committed by the Alleged Party in Breach.
13.4.2 A Fast Track Notice of Complaint alleging a breach of Disciplinary Rule 201 is only competent where the act of simulation involves:
13.4.2.1 simulation by the Alleged Party in Breach that he has been fouled; or
13.4.2.2 feigning injury, by the Alleged Party in Breach, in circumstances where: (i) the Alleged Party in Breach feigns that he has been struck or otherwise had contact made with him when he has not, or (ii) the Alleged Party in Breach feigns that he has been struck or otherwise had contact made with him upon a certain part of the body or head when he has not.
13.4.3 In addition a Fast Track Notice of Complaint alleging a breach of Disciplinary Rule 201 is only competent where “Substantial Advantage” was unfairly obtained as a consequence of the simulation. Substantial Advantage occurs where:
13.4.3.1 A penalty kick is awarded; or
13.4.3.2 A direct free kick is awarded and the team of the player who has simulated score directly from the free kick or in the immediate passage of play that follows the taking of that free kick; or
13.4.3.3 An opposing player is sanctioned for a sending off offence or the opposing player is sanctioned by a caution and this caution is one of the two cautions that led to his dismissal.
13.4.4 Where the allegation is that Disciplinary Rule 201 was breached by virtue of the Alleged Party in Breach simulating that he has been fouled a Fast Track Notice of Complaint is only competent where:
13.4.4.1 the opposing player challenging for the ball (and who is then penalised for committing a foul) did not make contact with the Alleged Party in Breach in the course of making that challenge; or
13.4.4.2 there is clear evidence that the Alleged Party in Breach deliberately initiated contact with an opposing player with the intention of deceiving the referee that a foul had been committed by that opposing player.
