The scatter-gun approach from the FA when it comes to matters of discipline is one they use quite often – particularly when they want to deflect from the poor performance of their own officials. They’ll dish out a load of charges to obscure the fact that competent handling of situations by a referee in the first place would have prevented much of the trouble they’re trying to take clubs and players to task for.
So it is with Mike Dean as charges are leveled Diego Costa and Gabriel, as well as both clubs, while there’s a warning for Santi Cazorla as to his future conduct for the way he behaved after being sent off on Saturday. Let’s look at the charges:
Diego Costa – has been charged for an alleged act of violent conduct which was not seen by the match officials but caught on video. The Chelsea forward was involved in an incident with Arsenal’s Laurent Koscielny in the 43rd minute of the game.
Nothing about his flick out at Oxlade-Chamberlain, and it seems as it’s just one incident with Koscielny when he pushed him in the face, gave him a back-handed slap and then bumped him over with his chest. I guess it’s too much to expect for him to be made accountable for all his actions, but at least there’s something. That’s it’s far too late and it should have happened during the 90 minutes is another thing, but that would require significant change as we know, and I doubt that will happen any time soon.
Gabriel – has been charged with improper conduct for his behaviour following his dismissal.
You are supposed to leave the pitch when sent off, he didn’t. Neither did Santi Cazorla who ‘has been warned for his behaviour following his sending off’, and while it seems particularly petty given the circumstances of both dismissals, it’s hard to argue with if we’re following the letter of the law [the same letter that sees nothing wrong with Costa’s kick at the Ox, by the way].
Then there this – both clubs have been charged for failing to control their players under FA Rule E20.
Looking at the FA handbook, Rule E20 states:
Each Affiliated Association, Competition and Club shall be responsible for ensuring:
(a) that its directors, players, officials, employees, servants, representatives, spectators, and all persons purporting to be its supporters or followers, conduct themselves in an orderly fashion and refrain from any one or combination of the following: improper, violent, threatening, abusive, indecent, insulting or provocative words or behaviour, (including, without limitation, where any such conduct, words or behaviour includes a reference, whether express or implied, to any one or more of ethnic origin, colour, race, nationality, religion or belief, gender, gender reassignment, sexual orientation or disability) whilst attending at or taking part in a Match in which it is involved, whether on its own ground or elsewhere; and
(b) that no spectators or unauthorised persons are permitted to encroach onto the pitch area, save for reasons of crowd safety, or to throw missiles, bottles or other potentially harmful or dangerous objects at or on to the pitch.
Which is just vague enough to cover everything, and we can ignore section (b) in this case as the charge specifically talks about ‘failing to control their players’. It can be brought against you if you have too many yellow cards, for example, or if there’s some kind of mass brawl or melee. And while there was some pushing and shoving around the Gabriel sending off, there was no sense that anything was out of control or that it might escalate beyond that.
So to me this charge, for both clubs, is complete bollocks. What about the referee’s failure to control the players? What about his failure to manage the flash-points in the game? He’s the one that brought Gabriel and Costa together and kept them together. He’s the one who told Nacho Monreal to go away when he could have acted as translator for Gabriel whose English isn’t really good enough to understand a lecture from an unctuous stand-in headmaster like Dean. He’s the one who could easily have ordered Gabriel or Costa to separate as the game got back underway.
And this is not to suggest the players themselves aren’t responsible for their own behaviour, but a better referee, one who hadn’t lost his grip on the game, would have managed that situation better and we might have had a good game of football. Instead, three days after the fact, we’re still discussing the consequences of how he got it wrong. Where’s the accountability for that?
Well, the good news for fans of West Ham and Norwich is that he’ll be refereeing that game on Saturday, with not a word about his role in this whole mess. I get that there’s a need not to undermine officials in general, but a system which allows them a free pass after such an abysmal display can’t be right either.
As well as that, Arsenal have appealed Gabriel’s red card as a ‘wrongful dismissal’, but I don’t think there’s any way we’re going to have that ban reduced. The Brazilian will miss three games, I’m sure, but it does look as if we’re set to welcome back Per Mertesacker who had his say on the Chelsea game, Costa, Gabriel and more. You can read it here, interesting stuff.
—
Elsewhere, as there’s talk of another £3m payment to Kroenke and Co for ‘services rendered’, the inimitable Swiss Ramble takes a look at Arsenal’s financials. Make a cuppa, get a biscuit and take the time to read this.
There’s no denying we’re sitting pretty:
Arsenal held 40% of the total cash in the Premier League that season: £208 million against £311 million for all 19 other clubs combined. Manchester United’s 2014/15 balance has increased to £156 million, but this is still £72 million less than Arsenal.
And with an extra £20m on the books:
There is substantial money available to spend. It’s clearly not as much as the £228 million in the books, but we can say with some conviction that there would be enough available in the January transfer window to safely cover some of the glaring weaknesses in the squad: let’s say £70-80 million (with the usual caveats).
As ever he presents things as they are, but with the requisite context – something too often missing when it comes to discussion of our money situation. For me it’s hard to understand why a manager who has been through a period of enforced austerity hasn’t taken fuller advantage of how things have changed for him. Maybe his caution and deep-lying to desire to get value for the money he spends is difficult to shake, but sometimes it takes a risk to get what you really want.
In 1999 wasn’t £10m (then a significant fee) on a winger struggling at Juventus, brought in to play at centre-forward – a job few thought he’d be up for – a risk? I know things are different and the market is different, but we’re now much more able to absorb a signing that doesn’t quite work out. The biggest risk is not spending at all. Anyway, have a read, there’s plenty in there.
Finally for today, if you haven’t had a chance to listen to the Arsecast Extra you can do that here or via the player below. We discuss all the weekend’s events and more, and keep an eye on the site in the next day or so for details of another Arsecast Extra Live event.
Right, we’ll have news throughout the day on Arseblog News. More from me tomorrow as we preview the Capital One Cup game with Sp*rs. Until then.
