Team Expelled from Leinster Football League over Assault and "Xenophobic Insults"

[Eorna]

If I had a €uro for every punch thrown or insult traded after football matches I'd either played in or watched in the Phoenix Park, I'd be a rich happy man.

I can't recall anyone ever looking to get even one player - never mind a whole club - banned.

I'd say that if you had a euro for every punch that was thrown at you, you would be a rich man in deed.

[Eorna]

I think that banning the entire team is a very unfair. The fact that the D- pills have leverage in the the FA do not want to be accused of racism is very objectionable. I would say that there is more to this story than meets the eye, who knows the Lats may have been a dirty team to play against, they might have started verbally abusing the Irish players. Just because they are not Irish does not mean they are necessarily right.

[JCSkinner]

Of course it can be correct if its unprecedented.
Have you heard of..........er.....unprecedented cases?

Maybe its time to take a stand against alleged thuggery and racism?

I don't think it's time to take a stand against ALLEGED anything, actually.

[The_SR]

This is the same JCSkinner who refuses to acknowledge sectarianism at his beloved Hearts or condemn the 6 county fans who attacked Polish homes.

Here is is giving out about the LSL taking a firm stance on racism in sport.

Anyone else see a pattern?

[JCSkinner]

OK. But if there had been complaints, for example based on you being a biased racist ba$tard, you could have dismissed that as playing the right card, right?

Never arose. But in that hypothetical circumstance, yes I could, because it would have had no foundation in reality.

I think your attitudes are very consistent with a certain agenda. It's one where foreigners deciding to play sport in an Irish league are derided for doing so (because they "won't have an Irishman on their team", says JCSkinner).

Is that or isn't it racism in your eyes?

But if they stay clear ("there's plenty of pitches in Riga", says JCSkinner, helpfully), they are said to be lacking a will to integrate and fit in.

No Irish on their team, demanding another team be expelled from the league... They're doing a great job of fitting in as far as I can see.

When they are abused and assaulted, the reaction is not one of urgent inquiry - as it should be towards sportsmen complaining of post-match assault.

The Leinster FA have that in hand. They are conducting an urgent inquiry and they are the people to do so.

Instead, it is presumed that any complaint is driven by bad motives ("the race card", a prejudicial description if ever there was one) and that any response by the league is not only disproportionate and unprecedented, but driven by a cowed fear of bad publicity.

The decision to expel the entire team on the basis of an allegation against one player is both disproportionate and unprecedented. And moreover, it has been taken because of a blackmail attempt by the Latvian team who are indeed playing the race card.

No mention is made of how the expelled club's players' previous poor behaviour may have been of influence in the league's decision.

If a player or players have misbehaved, that will be investigated. The question is whether any ALLEGED assault or abuse was actually racist and whether it warrants the expulsion of an entire team at the say-so of another team whose player make up implies they are not immune to racism themselves.

In short, everything is spun against the foreigner. We've seen it all before, JCSkinner.

Actually, a team from Ballyfermot has been kicked out of the league without precedent over an unproven allegation of racism. But yeah, it's the foreigners should have our sympathy...

That said, I think we all accept that there is a risk of over-reaction by authorities to complaints of racist behaviour. Even if racist behaviour is proven, the punishment may be unjust - especially if collective punishment is involved. But I'll always defend foreigners from the kind of ignorant, prejudiced treatment they're receiving on this thread.

Yawn. I'm sure you will.

[JCSkinner]

It might be useful for people to familiarise themselves with the rules of the Leinster FA as they apply in this case.
The relevant ones are 32 and 33:

Rule 32 - Breach of the Rules, etc

An infringement of any of the Rules of this Association and/or the Laws of the Game shall render any Club or League and any member of same, and any player of a club liable to expulsion, suspension, fine or such other penalty as the Council may think just.

Under rule 32, any breach of the rules or laws of the game may lead to an entire club, or even league being expelled. So they are indeed permitted to expel Landon if they so choose, subsequent to finding a breach of the rules or laws has been committed.
However:

Rule 33 – Cautionable / sending off offences

(a) In the event of cautionable / sending off offences on the part of any player, such player shall be cautioned by the Referee, in any case of violent conduct, the Referee, shall rule the offending player out of play, and order him off the ground, transmitting his name to the General Secretary/Administrator of this Association.
This Association shall have power to deal, by way of fine, suspension or otherwise, as it may think right, with any player cautioned or sent off.
(b) In the case of an alleged assault on a referee or assistant referee, the person or persons concerned shall stand suspended from the moment the alleged offence was committed. They shall not play or take part in football activities until their case is heard (within five days). If proved guilty, the minimum period of suspension is twelve months (this is an F.I.F.A. directive). The start of the hearing of the alleged assault must commence not later than five days after the reported offence...

Here the standard of punishment for violent conduct is made clear. Anyone ruled by the referee to be guilty of violent conduct is referred AS AN INDIVIDUAL to the FA for punishment.
Furthermore, even violent conduct upon a referee, deemed more serious than an assault on a player by FIFA and all its constituent bodies, warrants a minimum of a twelve month suspension on the INDIVIDUAL.

So the precedent is clear, as are the rules. There is no collective punishment for violence.

[NeilW]

So the precedent is clear, as are the rules. There is no collective punishment for violence.

Your position is that the league is acting outside its own rules?

[JCSkinner]

Your position is that the league is acting outside its own rules?

Under rule 32, they are entitled to expel anyone up to and including an entire league, if they find any breach of the rules or laws whatsoever.
It seems to me that that is a standard catch-all provision, designed to ensure that ultimate authority lies with the FA (as underwritten by the FAI, UEFA and FIFA, obviously.)
There are clear guidelines in rule 33 relating to how violent conduct should be treated. As I have demonstrated, these all cite individual punishment and individual responsibility.
There is a reference to the responsibility of clubs to ensure good behaviour by their players, officials and fans, of course. Here it is:

Every Club is responsible to the Council of this Association for the action of its players, officials and spectators, and is required to take all reasonable precautions to prevent verbal abuse, threatening or assaulting match officials and players or club officials before, during or after a match.

This is the sort of ruling that leads to clubs being fined or forced to play behind closed doors following incidents of rioting on the terraces or racist chanting or turfing coins at linesmen.
I'm still not aware of a precedent whereby the violent action of an individual, or even a number of individuals, ever led to the expulsion of an entire club from a league. And I mean ANYWHERE.
My position is that Landon have a great case for appeal on that basis, even in the event of a racist assault being proven. And it must be remembered, it has not been proven at this point in time, merely alleged by a team who do not exactly display the virtues of diversity in their own make up, and who are seeking to blackmail the FA in this regard.

[The_SR]

so to sum up:

- there was a fight at a game and an allegation of racist abuse was made.

- the LSL investigate and expel one of the teams from the league.

- JC Skinner claims its against the rules.

- JC Skinner then looks up the rules and realises its within the rules but 'unfair' and throws in a bit of light xenephobia.

-The rest of us die a little.

[Libero]

Under rule 32, they are entitled to expel anyone up to and including an entire league, if they find any breach of the rules or laws whatsoever.
It seems to me that that is a standard catch-all provision, designed to ensure that ultimate authority lies with the FA (as underwritten by the FAI, UEFA and FIFA, obviously.)
There are clear guidelines in rule 33 relating to how violent conduct should be treated. As I have demonstrated, these all cite individual punishment and individual responsibility...

We see what you're getting at. And I've admitted that the collective punishment could be excessive, depending on what happened that day and depending on the expelled team's "form".

But you're attitude to both the Leinster FA rules and customary practice in football disciplinary matters is strange and contradictory.

You make an appeal based expressly on the Leinster FA rules. But then you continue to refer to the assault and abuse as "alleged", even after the Leinster FA has made a finding of fact under those same rules based on the referee's report. (The referee's report being the customary source of independent evidence in football disciplinary matters.)

Do you accept that once you've acknowledged the authority of those Leinster FA rules, and the place of the referee's report, you have to accept the legitimacy (pending appeal) of a finding under those rules and based on the report? You can't suddenly opt out of respect for the rules and disciplinary process and refer to the offence as "alleged", just because it's not been proven in a court of criminal law or because you suspect some (unproven) element of overbearing influence on the FA.