Gabriel is charged with not leaving the pitch after he was not sent off

By Billy “the Dog” McGraw, resident psycho analyst at the Football Association

Gabriel Paulista was not sent off at Chelsea, or if he was sent off he should not have been and thus has not got to serve a ban of three matches for a twitch of the leg against the alien beast Costa.

Arsenal’s appeal was on the fact that the dismissal should never have happened.   The panel, said that since Dean was a vegetable he was unable to make a judgement and thus wrong.  Actually I may have overplayed that a bit and may not be quite accurate in my reporting, but anyway they said Dean was wrong – even though Dean had a perfect and uninterrupted view of the event.  (That is odd – normally they use the get out clause of the fact that the ref did not have a clear view and that the Video Ref system was… well, wasn’t.)

Next… what happens to the manifestation known as Dean.  The Guardian says he “can expect to be demoted from the Premier League list.”   Well, well. And with only 87294 having signed the petition.  But don’t give up – Dean might sneak back and the aim of the petition is to evacuate him from the presence of Arsenal forever.

So no red for Gabriel and technically he could play against the Tiny Totts tomorrow, but is unlikely to, given that Mert is fit and well.

But, and this is now the BIG story, Gabriel reacted to being sent off, and had to be aided by his team mates.   So the FA is now charging him with failing to leave the field of play AFTER HE WAS NOT SENT OFF!!!!!!!!

That charge is improper conduct – a charge levied by an improper authority.  So I suppose it is balanced.  The FA is very likely to go after this offence and find him guilty because they can then fine Gabriel, and the FA needs every penny it can lay its hands on.  It recently made about a third of its staff redundant, so desperate is its financial situation.

As suggested before, the precedent has been set with Nemanja Matic saw his ban reduced after reacting to a dangerous tackle by Burnley’s Barnes, with the FA accepting over a glass of sweet sherry that he had used a moderate “level of force” when pushing.

The FA also has a charge against both Chelsea and Arsenal for failing to control their players.   So what will they do with this one?   Arsenal had no one in the fracas sent off and rightly so.  But Chelsea had no one sent off and should have done.  So there is a disparity.

One thing is certain: the most likely outcome is going to be the wrong one.

Meanwhile Dr Carneiro is reported by the BBC to have left Chelsea, despite pleas from the club for her to stay, and it seems that given that the Premier League has failed to take action against Chelsea (word is Chelsea threatened all sorts of things against the PL if the PL did take action) she is free to sue them herself.  (Legal action is strongly discouraged by employees against a football club, although of course the law of the land permits it.  These things are supposed to be sorted out internally).

The claim, if it is made, will be constructive dismissal, which in essence means that the employer behaves in a way that makes it impossible for the employee to carry on.   So, for example, a contract might not say that a senior person in a company has an office, but if the company move him/her from his prestigious office into the data room among the IT geeks, that sort of action is good grounds for constructive dismissal.

It is reported that Dr Carneiro was told she should not attend training sessions, matches or be part of the preparations for a game at the team hotel, each of which would alone be grounds for a constructive dismissal charge.

The essence of the case has never been in doubt.  The medical team were twice waved onto the pitch by the ref.  The manager then called her naive and reduced her role at the club.

Then, with Chelsea already deep in the mire Mourinho destroyed any last vestige of hope that his club might have had of having a case, by making a public criticism of Dr Carneiro.  If you want to be sued by an employee engage in what is known as  “public humiliation” – that usually does it.

The basic law of England concerning working relationships makes it clear that the employer cannot and must not, without reasonable and proper cause, “conduct itself in a manner calculated and likely to destroy or seriously damage the relationship of trust and confidence between employer and employee.”

The old dinosaur of the Football Association is investigating a complaint that Mourinho used abusive language during the incident which is also an offence in football.  If Mourinho were found guilty he could be banned from the touchline for five games.  But this is the FA and Mourinho so the chances are he will probably be given a knighthood.

The allegation is that the Chelsea “manager” called the Doctor a son of a bitch in Portuguese.  As the Doctor is Gibraltarian she speaks Spanish and Portuguese as well as she speaks English.

Heather Rabbatts of the FA said that, “Eva was one of the few very senior women in the game, a highly respected doctor who has acted with professional integrity in difficult circumstances and whose skills have been highly praised by her colleagues, the club and governing bodies.”

But, you know, that’s Chelsea.



55 Replies to “Gabriel is charged with not leaving the pitch after he was not sent off”

  1. I’ve only seen the highlights, but it seemed to me that Gabriel turns around after the card and heads towards the touchline at which point he is further assaulted by Oscar and then Fabregas which leads to another fracas and any delay is down to these two provoking further confrontation – he should not go down for this either.

  2. It’s time for Untold to get their stats out and put together the historical case against Mike Dean from an Arsenal perspective. The football journalists (won’t have the time or resources to do it) will happily re-print while the story is hot. COYG

  3. Mike Riley must be loving Mr Dean for this botch up of the PGMOL agenda.

    I will always think of the game as ‘Game 51’ even though in the season it was game six.

  4. Dave Rght,
    The football journalists believe it is not n their interest to point out what is and has been going on . That is why we have to shame the authorities into acting.

  5. If Gabriel isn’t careful, he will become an Arsenal icon a la Adams and Vieira in his own lifetime.

  6. Can you please start a petition for AFC to sign Dr Eva Carneiro. She certainly knew how to keep those Chelsea players fit.

  7. Costa’s a marked man now though,all eyes wil be upon him.Still don’t get why Zouma got away with the neck grab-looks like that one got away. What a strange season for Gabriel so far,threats for the Wilshere injury, and now major hero for the team.That guy is going to get one heck of welcome when he plays next.
    Separated at birth, Gabriel Paulista and Neo Rauch?

  8. Billy how can you insult vegetables by association with Dean? He is not suitable for manure let alone anything to do with edibles.

    Al posted earlier that Fabregas is vile & I agree the Judas has been inducted into the Jose nasty club. He was there trying to assist in the sending off. He must never be allowed to taint Arsenal with his presence. He has lost all his honour that he gained with Arsenal.

  9. Dave Right – You’re right Dave! It really does call for a comprehensive study showing all Mike Dean’s diabolical biased decisions against Arsenal. I can’t wait to read Volume 1.

  10. Note all comments even from regular posters seem to go in moderation.
    I don’t know why but will try to keep an eye on it

  11. It’s all well and good…..but the damage has been done. We won’t get the 1 or 3 points back. Next step for the club should be to sue the refs and if possible the FA or even the EPL. Compromise could be a 1 point share between the 2 clubs? Just a thought.

  12. I agree, this is the time for a short summary of all the matches where Dean has committed crimes against Arsenal, mainly because my son is asking me about it (he’s an Arsenal fan too). He can’t be the only one.

  13. Costa denied any guilt.

    Chelsea said,

    “We are extremely disappointed with the FA Regulatory Commission’s decision to suspend Diego Costa. We will await their written reasons before commenting further,”

  14. Pete

    As I tried to point out on another thread based on the charge levelled against him by the FA and the published wording he was never going to get more than three games.

  15. Does anyone else feel a bit kicked in the little fella with Gabriel having his ban rightly rescinded and Costa rightly getting a 3 match ban, all of this somewhat fortunately (for the FA/PGMO) coming way too late once the match has been fixed and required result gained..,

  16. @The Billy The Dog 9:21 pm: “We will await their written reasons before commenting further.”

    When they get the written reasons, they’ll have to wait for someone to read it for them so they might miss the deadline for the appeal.

  17. Adrian Ginger Tosser Durham was obviously annoyed with the FA’s decision to hand out the violent conduct to Costa, and possibly over throwing Dean’s sending off of Gabriel, however, he is hoping FA still uphold misconduct call against Gabriel. Crying the like the bitch he is, he moaning such an outcome from the FA, also stating this decision undermines the events and officiating for the Ref.

    Durham contradicting himself on everything, what a prick!!!

  18. Gary Neville tweeted that Costa should not have been banned. And this guy is supposed to be coach for the national team? shocking.

  19. @MikeT,
    The FA gave the standard charge as you mentioned, but Chelsea have given a lifeline to the FA to make the right decision since Chelsea chose to appeal it.

    If Chelsea chose to appeal due to “Dismissals: Claims that the Standard Punishment is Excessive”, under Disciplinary Procedures (Article 6 (i) V), the punishment can now be increased:

    “If the Commision’s decision is to reject the claim, it will, in every case, go on to consider whether or not the Player’s punishment should be increased. If the Commission considers that the rejected claim had no prospect of success and/ or amounts to an abuse of process, the Commission shall have the discretion to increase the penalty up to twice the standard punishment set out in this Memorandum.

    In all other cases where the claim is rejected, the Player reported by the Referee shall serve the standard punishment as set out in this Memorandum. In all cases where a claim is rejected the fee shall be forfeited.”

    So hopefully, now it’s up to the Commission to do the right action, reject the claim, and double the standard punishment (up to 6 games) if they want to save any credibility.

  20. Please could Arsenal further endear themselves to all our dear friends down at Stamford Bridge by immediately offering Dr Eva Carneiro a place on our medical team. She will certainly enhance it.

  21. From the BBC website: –

    “Costa’s ban covers Chelsea’s League Cup match at Walsall on Wednesday along with Premier League matches against Newcastle and Southampton.

    Having confirmed the match officials did not see the incident between Costa and Koscielny, the FA supplied video footage to a panel of three former elite referees.

    Each had to independently rule Costa’s actions to be an instant red card for the FA to proceed with the charge.”

    Can anyone identify the panel members?

    Looks as if the kick at the Ox has been “missed” by the FA, also the dive early in the match. It would also appear that the various Costa assaults on Kos have been taken as one incident when really there were probably four separate assaults.

    Costa as an established previous offender, seems to have got off lightly so far.

    I am pleased that the red against Gabriel has been rescinded, but as he has not yet been fully cleared, the FA appear to have realised that while they cannot have a pound of flesh and a pint of blood, they are still hoping to take one if not the other.

  22. Agree with the comments above re Dr Carneiro – she obviously had too much class for the retards at the Bridge & would be a welcome addition at the Emirates!

  23. What footage did the Fa supply? I would prefer to see our Ref Review added to the footage. There were several nasty bits of petulant aggression as well as several unsporting behaviour incidents, not to mention a tirade of abuse in Gabriel’s ears.

    I am also hoping that Jose is done for his disrepute of the EPL by claiming the game as exhibited by Costa is what fans crave.

  24. Al.

    I think that Gary Neville must have been reprogrammed by whoever does that now, the phone company maybe, on behalf of their sport wing. He talked such sense when he started as a pundit. We all know by now that pundits aren’t really allowed to be positive about arsenal players, not for long anyway. The big problem is, we actually all know this, which is why it is such a surprise to us when the odd one does. And Gary Neville was very odd but I was getting to like his commentary and analysis, which was a surprise. Now maybe he has been normalised, like our own Paul Merson into regurgitating drivel. I still harp on about the press singling out Arsenal players. They assassinated Arshavin at a time when he had the best stats of any attacking midfielder in the country. Unfortunately, many of the depraved Arsenal ‘fans’, especially those over at the sister site, agreed that he simply had to go because they are not Arsenal fans and are incapable of independent thinking or positive speech.

    I remember a Sunderland lad, with his dad, sitting right near us at the Blackburn game three years ago. He spent a lot of energy slagging off Arshavin, so me and my son did our level best to shout for him and try to get those around us to as well. I don’t know about the rest of you but I thought Arshavin was an amazing player. I knew that Sir Alex’s mob was planting trolls on all our sites to try and get our fans to hate our own players, even the brilliant ones at that point, but it then occurred to me that they might be planting Mackhams at our home games to do the same. He did have a lot of rants against them down the road as well, to be fair and said he was an Arsenal fan, so I should give him the benefit of the doubt.

    On a totally different note, Eduardo got a double leg break from the worst tackle in premiership history, then in his first or second full game after recovery, he was wrongly sent off for diving, as someone mentioned yesterday. The card was rescinded when they realised that the goalkeeper had grabbed Eduardo’s foot of course. Everyone remembers. If any club deserved to have a siege mentality it is us, yet here we are, keeping it real and making things happen. Congratulations to everybody who keeps the faith.

    Last year, the pundits loved to talk about how Ozil wasn’t very good. Some still do but are themselves being reprogrammed because it is stupid to slag off a player who has been the best No. 10 in Europe since the beginning of the year. Yes, most pundits are virtually useless, as Roy Keane pointed out a couple of years ago. Lies and deceit are their ways now, as they have mostly gone over to the dark side. Too much money in the hands of greedy people turns them bad quicker than most things. But what has happened to Michael Owen, he seems to have had a mind blast on Saturday. He was being very positive about Arsenal, which, as far as I can remember was the only time he has been. He seemed to even sympathize. With such warped and delicate programming, full of such a total inversion of the facts, there is going to be the odd pundit who reverts to talking sense. When the Death Star goes down, will the Phone Company be able to cope with brainwashing all on its own?

  25. The FA have pulled a fast one with the 3 match ban of Costa. It is completely unbelievable that Mike Dean was able to claim that the yellow card issued to Costa during the game was for the chest bump on Koscielny. No way is that true!!! If you follow the sequence of events leading up to the yellow cards issues to Costa and Gabriel, Dean issued the cards after the 2 player who have been arguing slapped each other on the chest in front of him after he had finished speaking to them. Dean was not going to issue any cards until that incident happened and he got angry (check Arsenal player, the full first half is now live for all to see).

    So instead of Costa being punished for at least 5 offences, (3 against Koscielny and 2 against Gabriel) he is only being punished for the 1 offence on Koscielny and not even deemed to have done anything against Gabriel.

    The FA & PGMO accomplished their aim which was to gift Chelsea a win over Arsenal, making sure last season’s champions where not currently residing in the relegation zone after 6 games, giving them a morale boosting win to see if it will change their fortunes and also getting one over Arsenal as usual.
    Gabriel’s ban was rescinded because he is our 3rd choice defender, if it had been Koscielny or Giroud a first team player, the ban would have stood. By rescinding the ban it allowed them to only ban Costa for 3 matches. The fact is Costa has only been banned for 2 matches which he really would have been involved in.

    It is quiet worrying how the so called TV pundits and media outlets (SKY & BBC) presented FA with a way out and gave them a choice on how to react by going on about the 1 incident with Koscielny and how that should be a red card and 3 match ban.

    It is going to be very interesting to see if the FA ban Gabriel for his misconduct charge on Thursday and how long the ban is for. He could get a 3 match ban so as to be sure he is not available for 3 PL games. (Leicester city, Man United and Watford). Why the wait and why was it not decided today before tomorrow’s game? If anything, he misses a cup game?

    For those that think justice has been done are speaking to soon. The only justice that could have been done is for Arsenal to get back the 3 points stolen by Dean and Costa being banned for at least 6 PL games, his manager being charged for damaging the game, setting a bad example to young footballers and kids by condoning and praising Costa’s actions on the field.

  26. Sally Pally – whilst there was a sensible Gary Neville on TV for a while, I will always hate the sob & his brother for the tackles in game 50. That was the game that gave Riley the prize of running PGMO. SAF is that biggest lump of festering lard that bent this game aided & abetted by the Nevilles, Rooney & Co. In reality they are no different to Costa & Jose.

  27. Anyone else find it extremely statistically improbable that in back to back seasons in the same fixture (Chelsea v. Arsenal), Arsenal have had a player unfairly sent off by a referee who had not seen the incident, and who was getting information from the touch line?

    And by “unfairly sent off”, both sending off’s were successfully appealed and the red cards were rescinded.

  28. Gabriel red card rightly overturned but what about Mike Dean? Why is he refereeing this weekend? He made a mess of the entire situation and yet he gets off the hook. PGMO ladies and gentlemen

  29. I agree we could make up a summary of all Mike Dean’s crimes against us. The data is all there if somebody is up for it. Dogface refwatchs are a good start. He used to fire from all cylinders when Mike Dean was involved.

  30. I do hope that Dr Carneiro takes up a case against Moanin’inho and Chelski and gets to shaft them , then is signed by Arsenal . She would bring with her some juicy inside information that we could use. We could put up a petition to garner support for her .
    In the meantime , I expect some more fine humour ( and insults !) about Costa to keep us entertained . Who would not enjoy jokes about a fruity Brazilian nut baked in the Spanish sun and running berserk on English soil ?
    As the Terminator would have said , ” Hasta la vista , Costa !”

  31. Nuts joke.

    A guy goes into the bar and sits down and orders a drink. Other than the bartender, there’s no one else in the place. All of a sudden he hears a voice that says, “Nice suit.” He looks around and doesn’t see anyone and the bartender looks busy washing some glasses. A little while later the same voice says, “Nice Tie.” The guy looks around again and doesn’t see anyone. He finally asks the bartender if he just said something.
    “No,” replied the bartender, “it wasn’t me. It was probably the peanuts though. They’re complimentary.”

  32. This joke just reminded me of the FA , PGMOB and a few others !

    A policeman caught a nasty little boy with a bb gun in one hand and a squirrel in the other. “Now Listen here,” the policeman said, “Whatever you do to that poor, defenseless creature I shall personally do to you” “In that case,” said the boy. “I’ll kiss it’s butt and let it go”

  33. Justice done!!!!….

    I dont think so.

    The result of the game couldve been different. Will we get 1 point (atleast) added?? As I see it, This season its only 37 games for us.

  34. Hie guys. Its clear that the result of the match was influenced by wrong ref decisions. Why not have the match re-played at a neutral venue? Wembley?

  35. Dave Right “It’s time for Untold to get their stats out and put together the historical case against Mike Dean from an Arsenal perspective. ” Good idea. I would suggest add a link / details into the petition comments – although valid it it is not very comprehensive in terms of Dean’s mis-refereeing of Arsenal.

  36. Jerry

    You really do need to read the rule book in its entirety as opposed to just snippets

    Costa clearly disputed the charge, strange but that’s his right. The FA clearly didn’t suggest in the charge notice that they believed the standard punishment wasn’t sufficient. As I have said before that tied any commissions hands in terms of the ban. I’d the maximum was by default set at three games

    Once that standard punishment is imposed there is no right of appeal meaning neither the player or indeed the FA can appeal the sanction.

  37. Jerry

    The link you include in the second post is not the right part of the rule book. If that’s what you have been relying on I can see why you have posted previous comments

    The section in your link deals in effect with incidents dealt with at the time

    You need to go to page 339 of the handbook as this deals with in indents not seen by the officials but caught on video

  38. quick question, apart from mistaken identity, Gibbs / Ox last year, and I think Winterburn/limpar going back a few, can anyone else remember an arsenal players red card being rescinded ???

  39. Never liked costa from the first time i saw him. He is very hot headed and on a very short fuse. I am surprised that other players have not picked up on this, but now he seems to attack first because of his own failings.

    Most comments here have said it all concerning the incidentS so i will compliment them and not add any more.

  40. Like the idea of signing up the good lady doctor, would be a great thing, on many many levels…and that is not a critisism of our medics, just with our injury record, the more help we can get , the better. Yes, they get less injuries than us, though they are also a PGMOL protected species, may play a part in the injury issue.
    Bad week for Jose, the man RA didnt really want. Think things will get worse

  41. I send my best wishes to Doc Eva and bid her well in her forthcoming battle with the odious Chelsea FC.
    As a frequent visitor to her native land, I know she will be accustomed to bullying from a near neighbour but will be well prepared to deal with it. 😉

  42. @Mike T,

    Can’t type too much since I’m using the phone, but if you look at page 339-340 like you said, it tells you for violent conduct not seen by officials but found through video evidence to follow Schedule A, which is what I quoted from page 346 (In regards to the initial charges).

    In regards to the appeal, page 339 that you mention, says follow Schedule C, if you look at the decisions section of schedule C (starting on page 355, but focusing on decisions of the appeal board on page 358), it states:

    “The appeal board shall have the power to:
    (I) allow or dismiss the appeal;
    (ii) increase or decrease the penalty, award, or sanction originally imposed
    (iii) make such further or other order as it considers appropriate.”

    You were in the right section, but didn’t follow the directions set out in that area to go to the appropriate areas in regards to the charge and appeal process for the situation.

    Not surprised, since the FA tries to make the handbook confusing, and well, Chelsea is not exactly known for following the rule book ?.

  43. Jerry

    The whole point is that once a 3 gain ban is imposed then that can’t be the subject of an appeal
    I think that’s on page 340

  44. Jerry

    I appreciate you are on the phone so am copying below the relevant bit from the rule book

    As we agree Schedule A) is the not seen by the match official

    The bit detailed at a 1)is the relevant part

    (a) Criteria
    An appeal may be lodged against the decision of a Regulatory Commission subject to the
    following criteria:
    (i) For Incidents dealt with under the Standard Directions at Schedule A – an appeal
    may be lodged only by a Participant and only; (i) in the event that the penalty
    imposed is either in excess of a three-match suspension where the Misconduct
    charge was for violent conduct or serious foul play, or in excess of a six-match
    suspension where the Misconduct charge was for spitting; (ii) on the single
    ground that the penalty imposed is excessive; and (iii) in respect of that part of

  45. @Mike T,
    Oh ok, I see where our difference of opinion is. If you look at page 332 in the 2015-2016 Handbook, as we are in agreement Schedule A applies, under B Timings (ii The Reply) it states:

    “In denying the Charge, the Player may also claim that the standard punishment would be clearly excessive having regard to the factors set out at (d)(i).”

    Costa denied the charge (Last paragraph-

    Since Costa denied the charge, the punishment could have been increased according to:

    “In all cases, the Regulatory Commission may increase any punishment that it imposes if it believes a denial of the Charge or any claim by the Player that the standard punishment would be clearly excessive in their case, to have been an abuse of process or without any significant foundation.”

    So the Regulatory Commission was well within their rights to increase the standard punishment if they wanted to, but unfortunately they are a bunch of cowards and decided the standard 3 match punishment was enough. Costa misses a meaningless League Cup game and 2 PL matches against struggling teams.

    The only possible way the Costa ban can be increased now is if Chelsea decides to go completely guns blazing against the FA decision like the Star said they’re considering or appeal based on point (ii) in the criteria you listed (on the single ground that the penalty imposed is excessive).

    So you are right that the ban can not be increased now since the regulatory commission’s decision has been made.

    I am also right that the ban could have been increased since Costa denied the charge and if the regulatory commission were not cowards.

    Gabriel, on the other hand, will most likely get suspended for 3 PL matches (including 1 vs United).

    In summary, Chelsea get 3 points they didn’t deserve, and lose a player retrospectively for 3 non-essential matches. Arsenal have 3 points stolen due to an incompetent referee, and will lose a key player against top 4 opposition.

  46. Jerry

    I have to be honest and say that I have read the rules, both previous years and indeed this years version and had for some reason taken it that paragraph was a lot about frivilous appeals but as you quite rightly point out it goes wider

    What it does go to prove is that when the FA say something in their rule book as being a definitive you can be dammed sure that there is something somewhere else that says something along the lines of it is but “……

    Great exchange none the less

  47. Agree good exchange, nice positive debate! In regards to the FA, they always make back ways to get around the rule, only way a corrupt organization could work!

Comments are closed.