Argyle and Wycombe charged and fined. Update

[Gary Wills]

Yes but that merely impacts their fine, not the finding, doesn't it?
Garanus joined Wimbledon a decade or so too late for what he thinks he could have been perhap, but that too is obiter dicta as the shunned actor might filosophyz.

 

[Ponty]

Yes but that merely impacts their fine, not the finding, doesn't it?
Garanus joined Wimbledon a decade or so too late for what he thinks he could have been perhap, but that too is obiter dicta as the shunned actor might filosophyz.

Easy for you to say....

 

[IJN]

:greensmile:

Gary is our Stanley Unwin.

 

[Ade the green]

Wycombe do have previous form with the FA....

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/footba ... rules.html

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/29727549

http://www.football.co.uk/wycombe-wande ... F8TiyTc.97

Ainsworth involved in this one and sent off ... http://www.getbucks.co.uk/sport/footbal ... ne-5724266

The two sets of players clashed after a foul by Gareth Ainsworth on Lions defender Tony Craig which saw the former QPR midfielder sent-off.
It was the second time that the two player's had clashed after Ainsworth broke Craig's cheekbone with an attempted overhead kick in the reverse fixture.

You'd think a club with such a small budget, as Ainsworth keeps telling everyone, they would get their house in order to stop the regular payments to the FA. Are they paying their fines by standing order or direct debit?

I'm guessing they'll have an even smaller budget next year when the advertising space on their kits are replaced with a government health warning.

 

[nick_PASTIE]

Probably posted elsewhere but the link shows this footage leaves no dispute about where blame lies- will be nice when FA force Wycombe to apologise and fine Ainsworth a months wages. Lots of solidarity from fans of the honourable Yellows too!

http://yellowsforum.co.uk/thread/22941/ ... py-wycombe

 

[Dalton Is God]

They only get one day to respond?

What happened in the 41st minute?

Going from memory, Carl McHugh was caught and in turn was late into a challenge with Bean (I think), Hayes came charging in from about 20 yards away which in turn led to both teams pushing and shoving with by far the most aggressive being Paul Hayes.

I don't know what happened when Hayes was here briefly on loan but I have never, ever seen any other player show so much aggression towards us a club since he left. His outward joy when he has managed to s ore against us is so far out of proportion that I wonder if the poor lamb was bullied by WottonAdams perhaps. I'd say his reaction makes Ashley Barnes' goal celebration seem demure and always has an element of up yours to it. Bearing in mind we were his route back into playing after a nasty injury he ought to have shown some restraint.

I think it was Tanner (possibly Wylde) who was caught and the ref blew but McHugh was already committed to a sliding tackle on Cowan-Hall (?). McHugh was rightly booked for the challenge. Hayes was booked for his part in the fracas afterwards. The ref could have booked a few others. If McHugh had fallen over as soon as Hayes arrived - Hayes would probably have seen red.

Not this tackle I take it? Looks a perfectly solid tackle to me!

https://youtu.be/16Jdc7mC3io?t=48s

 

[Jasa]

They only get one day to respond?

What happened in the 41st minute?

Going from memory, Carl McHugh was caught and in turn was late into a challenge with Bean (I think), Hayes came charging in from about 20 yards away which in turn led to both teams pushing and shoving with by far the most aggressive being Paul Hayes.

I don't know what happened when Hayes was here briefly on loan but I have never, ever seen any other player show so much aggression towards us a club since he left. His outward joy when he has managed to s ore against us is so far out of proportion that I wonder if the poor lamb was bullied by WottonAdams perhaps. I'd say his reaction makes Ashley Barnes' goal celebration seem demure and always has an element of up yours to it. Bearing in mind we were his route back into playing after a nasty injury he ought to have shown some restraint.

I think it was Tanner (possibly Wylde) who was caught and the ref blew but McHugh was already committed to a sliding tackle on Cowan-Hall (?). McHugh was rightly booked for the challenge. Hayes was booked for his part in the fracas afterwards. The ref could have booked a few others. If McHugh had fallen over as soon as Hayes arrived - Hayes would probably have seen red.

Rightly booked? Was a clean challenge. Just because the Wycombe player went down holding his thigh, which he was nowhere near, a fracas evolved.

 

[Lundan Cabbie]

The charge is failing to control players and officials. The reasons why they may have been out of control, ie the refereeing, heavy tackles or any other provocation will NOT be considered as a reasonable excuse. I fear both clubs will be found guilty.

 

[IJN]

Could be taken in mitigation.

Even people with no common sense can understand that defence, surely.

 

[Lundan Cabbie]

Could be taken in mitigation.

Even people with no common sense can understand that defence, surely.

Clutching at straws Ian. This is the FA we are talking about.

 

[Keepitgreen]

The charge is failing to control players and officials. The reasons why they may have been out of control, ie the refereeing, heavy tackles or any other provocation will NOT be considered as a reasonable excuse. I fear both clubs will be found guilty.

Study the footage LC. The Argyle players were under control, trying to stop Hayes and a couple of others getting to McHugh. Not guilty guvnor.

 

[Lundan Cabbie]

The charge is failing to control players and officials. The reasons why they may have been out of control, ie the refereeing, heavy tackles or any other provocation will NOT be considered as a reasonable excuse. I fear both clubs will be found guilty.

Study the footage LC. The Argyle players were under control, trying to stop Hayes and a couple of others getting to McHugh. Not guilty guvnor.

What about the tunnel stuff though? I've not seen any footage but I was listening to Sparksy's commentary and that sounded meaty enough.

 

[Keepitgreen]

The charge is failing to control players and officials. The reasons why they may have been out of control, ie the refereeing, heavy tackles or any other provocation will NOT be considered as a reasonable excuse. I fear both clubs will be found guilty.

Study the footage LC. The Argyle players were under control, trying to stop Hayes and a couple of others getting to McHugh. Not guilty guvnor.

What about the tunnel stuff though? I've not seen any footage but I was listening to Sparksy's commentary and that sounded meaty enough.

It's 2 charges though so I'd like to think they'll find in our favour for the first. As for the 2nd, I don't know if there's any footage of that other than a group of bodies at the end of the tunnel. We can't see what's going on under there. Maybe the 4th official did.

 

[pilgrimmike1]

The charge is failing to control players and officials. The reasons why they may have been out of control, ie the refereeing, heavy tackles or any other provocation will NOT be considered as a reasonable excuse. I fear both clubs will be found guilty.

Study the footage LC. The Argyle players were under control, trying to stop Hayes and a couple of others getting to McHugh. Not guilty guvnor.

What about the tunnel stuff though? I've not seen any footage but I was listening to Sparksy's commentary and that sounded meaty enough.

If you've seen no footage LC how come you can reach a guilty on Argyle roblem: You don't now anything about the tunnel like most of us.

 

[Lundan Cabbie]

The charge is failing to control players and officials. The reasons why they may have been out of control, ie the refereeing, heavy tackles or any other provocation will NOT be considered as a reasonable excuse. I fear both clubs will be found guilty.

Study the footage LC. The Argyle players were under control, trying to stop Hayes and a couple of others getting to McHugh. Not guilty guvnor.

What about the tunnel stuff though? I've not seen any footage but I was listening to Sparksy's commentary and that sounded meaty enough.

If you've seen no footage LC how come you can reach a guilty on Argyle roblem: You don't now anything about the tunnel like most of us.

Someone official saw something for the charge to be made in the first place. It will be their statement that will be the basis of of the charges. Events were seen by someone otherwise we'd not be here where we are now. The lack of video may well be to Argyle's detriment because it might have contradicted this official's report.