How many games will he be banned for? Poll

[markcd]

I have no clue - probably they'll hang him.

 

If the ref had seen it, and sent him off - could the FA have given more than a 3 game ban? (I know Barton got more against City, but wasn't that because he committed another red card offence on his way off?)

[Trumo]

The FA like to shift the goalposts whenever it suits them, so it would come as no surprise if they move to have him put down, much like what happens when a dog attacks somebody.

[ChrisM]

I have no clue - probably they'll hang him.

 

If the ref had seen it, and sent him off - could the FA have given more than a 3 game ban? (I know Barton got more against City, but wasn't that because he committed another red card offence on his way off?)

 

Yes they can, if it's exceptional circumstances, such as Thatchers elbow on Mendes, for which he was initially booked.

[sybian]

The way the gutter press are reporting the incident hung, drawn, and quarterd I should guess.

[rainman]

Doesn't it all depend upon what whisky nose decides? He'll want to damage us for next season also.

[mike23]

More than 5 I'd imagine. You never really know with the FA. They really seem to make it up as they go along and punishments seem to vary from nothing to excessively long bans for similar offences. They also seem to base their decisions on how they think it will make them look in the media so they'll come out with as long a ban as possible so all the sports journalists write nice things about them.

[Strontium]

If the FA were blessed with fairmindedness, they'd want to draw a line under this as soon as possible, take into account Luis's apology and Ivanovic's gracious acceptance of it, and fast-track a hearing that would ban Luis for the remaining 4 matches of the season. A common sense solution that would give everyone a long summer to forget about it.

 

That's not what the Ferguson Association are like, however, so I can quite easily see them opting for something between 8 and 12 match ban, despite it being Luis's first offence of violent conduct in this country.

[DaveT]

They'll probably bvurn him at the stake. After all, he is a witch, isn't he?

[ChrisM]

Yeah I'm not sure why I keep hearing that he will probably get longer because it's a second offence, when the first offence happened under a differing jurisdiction. It 'should' have no bearing whatsoever.

 

My worry is that they link it to his previous ban when he was warned over his 'future conduct'.

[Magic Sponge]

He'll get the electric chair.

[Whelan]

It depends on who is deciding upon the punishment!

 

[xerxes]

so I can quite easily see them opting for something between 8 and 12 match ban, despite it being Luis's first offence of violent conduct in this country.

 

 

I enjoyed that.

[cole7]

He only got 6 games at Ajax as one was for a previous red card. Can't be more than that surely

[Newport]

I fear more of the club's reaction to an eventual verdict than the ban itself. If he gets an outrageous ban the FA should be flooded with examples of their own neglect in incidents much worse than what Luis did. Unfortunately I can't see that happen.

[zigackly]

When the FA ban someone for violent conduct, do they take into account the seriousness of the violence, or is the length of the sentence purely dictated by the newspapers?

[Newport]

When the FA ban someone for violent conduct, do they take into account the seriousness of the violence, or is the length of the sentence purely dictated by the newspapers?

 

Hypothetically speaking?

[zigackly]

Rhetorically speaking. I think we all know it's whatever the newspapers demand.

[Newport]

Rhetorically speaking. I think we all know it's whatever the newspapers demand.

 

I don't see how they could not be obliged to take it into consideration. If he got more than three games I'd be very interested to see how they justify it. It's hardly a serious act of violent conduct that demands any further action than the usual punishment for a red card.

[Jairzinho]

Rhetorically speaking. I think we all know it's whatever the newspapers demand.

 

What newspapers demand - size of club's testicles = length of ban.

[Nelly-Szoboszlai]

It should be 4 or 5 games, maximum. However, it will probably be about 10 to 12 games. Or getting hung, drawn and quartered on County Road after the derby.

 

An Evertonian on the Echo Facebook page actually, without a hint of sarcasm, suggested a full season ban. To clarify, not ban him for the rest of this season, but ban him for a full season, a whole 38 games.

 

Fucking imbeciles.

[Strontium]

I don't see how they could not be obliged to take it into consideration. If he got more than three games I'd be very interested to see how they justify it. It's hardly a serious act of violent conduct that demands any further action than the usual punishment for a red card.

 

 

They may elect to punish him for "bringing the game into disrepute"? I'm not sure how that rule works though.

 

Well, you can't have players bringing the game into disrepute, I suppose; the FA does a good enough job of it aleady.

[zigackly]

They may elect to punish him for "bringing the game into disrepute".

 

Well, you can't have players bringing the game into disrepute, I suppose; the FA does a good enough job of it aleady.

 

They are doing him for violent conduct and feel three matches isn't sufficient. FA statement here.

[Newport]

This is where the bar is at. Balotelli got four games for this, which in my opinion is far worse.

[YOUTUBE]Y2cDMhEByWc[/YOUTUBE]

[Pureblood]

Ten.

 

Changed my mind. It will be six.

[Whelan]

This is where the bar is at. Balotelli got four games for this, which in my opinion is far worse.

[YOUTUBE]Y2cDMhEByWc[/YOUTUBE]

 

He got away with one last season against the Arsenal player (can't remember who), as Atkinson saw it, been up against the FA once and then 4 matches for a repeated offense!

 

Seriously -it cannot be more than 4. 5, just to make sure we are inconvenienced next season.