Chesham United v Redditch United abandoned match

It is always going to come down to interpretation, but there are basically 3 rules that cover games being abandoned.

Rule 8.3.3 - “In the event that a match is abandoned for reasons over which neither Club has control the Club playing at home shall retain the gate receipts for such uncompleted match and the Board shall determine the terms upon which any replayed match shall be played”

Rule 8.3.4 - “In the event of a match being abandoned due to the conduct of one club or its members or supporters the Board has the power to order that the match is not replayed and to award either one or three points to the club not at fault. It cannot levy a financial penalty due to the conduct of a club.”

Rule 8.3.5 - “In the event of the match being abandoned due to the conduct of both Clubs or their members or supporters no financial penalty can be applied by the Board to either Club and the Board shall determine whether the original match stands as a completed match or is replayed and, if replayed, the terms upon which the match is to be replayed”

The Chesham argument was that if Rule 8.3.4 is not going to be used in this instance, when will it ever? The action of sacking the player was commendable, but also a bit of a no-brainer, who would not sack the player? At the end of the day he arrived with Redditch, was wearing the Redditch shirt, paid by Redditch and has to be seen as representing Redditch. The fact that it was just the one player involved is good in that it should not blight the name of the club, but for the reason of the abandonment, surely it has to fall to one club? It was after all the away dressing room door that got smashed when the player left the field? (albeit a reluctance from your Chairman to accept responsibility and pay for the damage, which is a real shame as it has of course happened before, but every time, whether it is a Reserves, youth or first team game, the opponents have paid for damage done by their players) And hence Rule 8.3.4 above?

The quote on the website about that "the FA confirmed that no fault has been apportioned to Redditch United" sounds surprising as I don't believe the FA were involved until the Appeal. It may well be that you mean the Southern League and not the FA, in which case they did not proportion blame in their interpretation of the facts which they presumably got from somewhere as they did not contact Chesham for any information before making their original decision.

It will be a real shame if this causes any rifts between the clubs, the supporters of Redditch were superb on the day of the game, and it was spoilt by the actions of one player. Unfortunately it was a Redditch player who ruined the day for many. Redditch and Chesham should probably have been involved to put their cases when the Southern League made their decision, that is probably the mistake. Once the decision was made, Chesham's only appeal was against the League and I don't believe we had any communication from Redditch wishing to be present, if there was any, it must have been made to the league.

i hope it call be put behind us and both teams enjoy the rest of the season.

A Chesham Fan wrote:It is always going to come down to interpretation, but there are basically 3 rules that cover games being abandoned.

Rule 8.3.3 - “In the event that a match is abandoned for reasons over which neither Club has control the Club playing at home shall retain the gate receipts for such uncompleted match and the Board shall determine the terms upon which any replayed match shall be played”

Rule 8.3.4 - “In the event of a match being abandoned due to the conduct of one club or its members or supporters the Board has the power to order that the match is not replayed and to award either one or three points to the club not at fault. It cannot levy a financial penalty due to the conduct of a club.”

Rule 8.3.5 - “In the event of the match being abandoned due to the conduct of both Clubs or their members or supporters no financial penalty can be applied by the Board to either Club and the Board shall determine whether the original match stands as a completed match or is replayed and, if replayed, the terms upon which the match is to be replayed”

The Chesham argument was that if Rule 8.3.4 is not going to be used in this instance, when will it ever?

Agreed, as you said, Josh was representing RUFC that day and his sin was our sin.

(albeit a reluctance from your Chairman to accept responsibility and pay for the damage, which is a real shame as it has of course happened before, but every time, whether it is a Reserves, youth or first team game, the opponents have paid for damage done by their players)

Really? That disappoints me; that detail had clearly escaped me earlier.

It will be a real shame if this causes any rifts between the clubs... Redditch and Chesham should probably have been involved to put their cases when the Southern League made their decision, that is probably the mistake... i hope it call be put behind us and both teams enjoy the rest of the season.

Agreed; here's hoping for a full 90 minutes free from controversy when you come to the Valley at the end of February.

A Chesham Fan wrote:It is always going to come down to interpretation, but there are basically 3 rules that cover games being abandoned.

Rule 8.3.3 - “In the event that a match is abandoned for reasons over which neither Club has control the Club playing at home shall retain the gate receipts for such uncompleted match and the Board shall determine the terms upon which any replayed match shall be played”

Rule 8.3.4 - “In the event of a match being abandoned due to the conduct of one club or its members or supporters the Board has the power to order that the match is not replayed and to award either one or three points to the club not at fault. It cannot levy a financial penalty due to the conduct of a club.”

Rule 8.3.5 - “In the event of the match being abandoned due to the conduct of both Clubs or their members or supporters no financial penalty can be applied by the Board to either Club and the Board shall determine whether the original match stands as a completed match or is replayed and, if replayed, the terms upon which the match is to be replayed”

The Chesham argument was that if Rule 8.3.4 is not going to be used in this instance, when will it ever? The action of sacking the player was commendable, but also a bit of a no-brainer, who would not sack the player? At the end of the day he arrived with Redditch, was wearing the Redditch shirt, paid by Redditch and has to be seen as representing Redditch. The fact that it was just the one player involved is good in that it should not blight the name of the club, but for the reason of the abandonment, surely it has to fall to one club? It was after all the away dressing room door that got smashed when the player left the field? (albeit a reluctance from your Chairman to accept responsibility and pay for the damage, which is a real shame as it has of course happened before, but every time, whether it is a Reserves, youth or first team game, the opponents have paid for damage done by their players) And hence Rule 8.3.4 above?

The quote on the website about that "the FA confirmed that no fault has been apportioned to Redditch United" sounds surprising as I don't believe the FA were involved until the Appeal. It may well be that you mean the Southern League and not the FA, in which case they did not proportion blame in their interpretation of the facts which they presumably got from somewhere as they did not contact Chesham for any information before making their original decision.

It will be a real shame if this causes any rifts between the clubs, the supporters of Redditch were superb on the day of the game, and it was spoilt by the actions of one player. Unfortunately it was a Redditch player who ruined the day for many. Redditch and Chesham should probably have been involved to put their cases when the Southern League made their decision, that is probably the mistake. Once the decision was made, Chesham's only appeal was against the League and I don't believe we had any communication from Redditch wishing to be present, if there was any, it must have been made to the league.

i hope it call be put behind us and both teams enjoy the rest of the season.

I for 1 think that this decision is the correct one and the only issue being that the FA should have done it in front of both clubs and put it to bed fully. Also I don't see any Redditch United fan would blame Chesham FC for any of these problems as they were the direct result of 1 players who has let himself, the club and it's fans with his actions on that day.

I look forward to you visiting the Valley for what hopefully will be a fair quality game between 2 good sides but hope you get beaten fair and square on the pitch and don't smash up the dressing rooms

I'll drink to that - Apart from the losing bit. Good luck with forthcoming gamJes, looks as though you may well be on the play-off mix the way things are going, could be a big game.

Oh dear. Looks as though this incident is not going to be put to bed and your Chairman is planning to contest the decision. Shame. Thought it might be all put into the past and everyone can forget about the whole incident and move on.

Any link to this news Chesh Fan?

Very much - reliable - word of mouth from last night so it might not be gospel but when enquiring about whether the repairs to the dressing room door had been paid for I was told that it had not, Redditch still do not accept that the game will not be replayed and have been in consultation with the FA and intend to contend the decision. Not sure why the replaying of the match affects whether the door gets paid for or not mind.
Sorry. Do not have any more than that. It will become a watch this space I guess but I think you will find it to be true.

See back page of the Advertiser.

It appears the chairman is contesting the FA's decision. It seems to me that he's doing himself and the Club no favours if he does. (I personally think that the FA got it right!). There are times when you need to take things on the chin and get on with it!

Is there an online version of the Advertiser with the article?

Do not get me wrong. I agree that Redditch should have had a voice, but that should have been when the Southern League were making the decision. They should have contacted both clubs to get some facts, views and opinions. Chesham had no say, no communication, at this stage whatsoever either. Only when the league announced the decision and advised the club of it's right to appeal did the appeal take place.

But as you say about "taking it on the chin". Sometimes that is the best thing. I would have thought dragging up the fact that a player hit the referee and caused a game to be postponed is not really in anyone's best interest.

http://edition.pagesuite-professional.co.uk/launch.aspx?referral=other&refresh=W1n8y30G9Zo1&PBID=3dba1010-05e0-429e-8150-1580539a5d18&skip=

Let it rest, pay for the door and get on with the rest of the season. Bad decision by Swan.

Wow.

I must admit I find that really quite offensive to suggest that the referee had no protection and fans were banging on the door. That is simply not true. And to try and turn the blame on to us is quite staggering.

I guess it is not just going to go away.

This article is laughable and could be constured as libel.

A I understand it, the club recieved email praise from the referee asking for his thanks to be passed on to the stewards for the extremely professional way the incident was dealt with, Calling them a credit to the club, for ensuring that he and his team were given the time and space needed after the game.

At no point was anyone other than the Police and the Assesor allowed into the Referees area. Both Management Teams wanted access to the officials but that was also refused until after the Police had finished

Can't believe the club are wasting there time and money with this appeal.

Guranteed it will be rejected

I’m both surprised by this and I’m not.

I expected this appeal after Mr. Swans previous quotes to the press. What surprises me is that Mr. Swan obviously cares a great deal about the image of our club. He has gone out of his way to raise the awareness and improve the image of Redditch United. There is Graham Hyde in his community development role, cancer awareness days, supporting the YMCA, youth team development, immediately sacking McKenzie etc. But the decision to appeal is a PR disaster.

Yes, he was at the game and I was not. But, the vast majority of people who will take an interest in this decision were not at the game either. What happened outside the referees changing room is a side issue. The main and overriding issue is what happened on the pitch when McKenzie struck the referee.

I understand the principal involved; that the FA’s appeal process is flawed. But we have to take it on the chin. If it was me in charge, I’d make public my concerns about the appeal process, but accept that the right decision has been made, smile and carry on.

http://www.cheshamunited.co.uk/#redditchresponse

Club statement in response to press articles
Friday 13th January 2012

Chesham United Football Club is aware of reports in the local Redditch press with regard to the abandoned match with Redditch United last year, in which the Chairman of Redditch United alleges that one of the reasons that the game could not continue was because Chesham United FC failed to provide sufficient protection for the match officials.

For the avoidance of doubt, Chesham United FC would like to make it abundantly clear that at no point did any fans have access to the changing room area at The Meadow, and any statement or insinuation to the contrary is entirely without foundation. Indeed, after the incident we received communication from the match official commending Chesham United FC on the stewarding of this unfortunate incident and the protection given to the referee and his assistants. As well as our own stewards members of the local constabulary were ensuring that access to the changing room area was completely controlled during their own investigations.

We are extremely disappointed that a fellow member of the football family should choose to attempt to sully the name of another club in this way, and feel obliged to set the record straight and express our absolute dismay, that someone is prepared to suggest that the reason the game was abandoned, when a Redditch United player struck the referee, was in anyway the fault of Chesham United Football Club.

Not sure why Mr Swan is dragging this on so long ?

Any news on the date for Mr Swan's hearing with the FA ?

I wonder what sanctions the league will place on Redditch after their board meeting tomorrow ?

http://www.redditchadvertiser.co.uk/sport/redditchunited/evo_stik_southern_premier_2011_2012/read_article/9492839.Hyde__Goals_will_come.

latest on the story

In the aftermath of the incident Redditch and Mr Swan came out of it with a lot of credit due to his swift action in dealing with the player. The Chesham fans appreciated the fact he apologised to them in bar after the abandonment of the game. No blame was apportoined to the club itself and both sets of fans rightly condemned the player in question. The decision the FA came to, however flawed the process may or may not have been, was surely one of natural justice? How sad that the previous goodwill between the two clubs is being eroded by what on the face of it appears to be a pointless and surely doomed appeal.

I note Marley, who usually is never short of an opinion, has yet to comment on whether he thinks this appeal is a good idea?

Mr Bonehead wrote:In the aftermath of the incident Redditch and Mr Swan came out of it with a lot of credit due to his swift action in dealing with the player. The Chesham fans appreciated the fact he apologised to them in bar after the abandonment of the game. No blame was apportoined to the club itself and both sets of fans rightly condemned the player in question. The decision the FA came to, however flawed the process may or may not have been, was surely one of natural justice? How sad that the previous goodwill between the two clubs is being eroded by what on the face of it appears to be a pointless and surely doomed appeal.

I note Marley, who usually is never short of an opinion, has yet to comment on whether he thinks this appeal is a good idea?

Your fascination on all things Marley is starting to get a little unsettling....quite wierd really.

Anyway, as I have said many times before, I only make my opinion known when I have all the facts...I was not at the game, so I will not comment too much.
I thought the action of the club at the time was correct...I do not agree with Mr Swan's decision to appeal, although I have not seen any official statement...just the usual 'he said, they said'.

One thing is for sure, Mr Wenger, Mr Ferguson, Mr Moyes etc would also appeal the decision...a stupid act by one individual should not impact on everyone else involved and being a player myself, you always want to play the game at every opportunity.

Are you satisfied Mr Bonehead....?

[quote="cheshfan"]Any news on the date for Mr Swan's hearing with the FA ?quote]


It's All gone Quiet over there shhhhhh

Ches Fan,
The lack of response should indicate the level of interest on here. If you direct your points at the Chairman you may get some response. I don't think the game should be replayed, most of us here don't. That's my opinion, but I don't own the club.Regarding the door that was damaged, I think if our (ex) player damaged your door he should pay for it himself , not the club. Just my opinion.

porrohman wrote:Ches Fan,
The lack of response should indicate the level of interest on here. If you direct your points at the Chairman you may get some response. I don't think the game should be replayed, most of us here don't. That's my opinion, but I don't own the club.Regarding the door that was damaged, I think if our (ex) player damaged your door he should pay for it himself , not the club. Just my opinion.

^ This. Ches fan needs to write to Mr Swan with his frustrations. As fans we don't have any say here so do us a favour and drop it!

That's it now, it's all over!!! The FA have rejected our appeal. Time to move on.