THIS ARTICLE IS PART OF A SERIES OF CASES ORIGINALLY PUBLISHED BY THE FOOTBALL ASSOCIATION AND HIGHLIGHTED BY KENTONLINE IN A BID TO IMPROVE BEHAVIOUR IN OUR GAME
A Sunday League player was handed a lengthy ban for grabbing and threatening a referee during a post-match confrontation.
Kent Marina player Luke James denied FA charges of improper conduct towards a match official with an FA disciplinary report alleging he’d told the referee: “I will knock you out you silly c***.”
Mr James’ defence was that he only grabbed the referee having being pushed first after he had questioned the official over his decision to sin bin him and then send him off.
The FA National Serious Case Panel was called upon to look into allegations made by the referee following Kent Marina’s match against Bredhurst Juniors Seniors at Luton Rec in October.
Their disciplinary commission found the referee’s evidence “clear and compelling” and issued Mr James with a suspension from all football activities for 143 days along with a £75 fine. The player also had to complete a face-to-face mandatory education programme.
The FA commissioner said that: “I note that (Mr James) grabbed the referee’s arm and threatened him.
“He states that this was because the referee had pushed him. There was no remorse shown and no apology offered on the day or since.”
The FA’s report included a summary of the evidence and a statement from the referee.
Mr James was said to have approached the referee with another player “to question his sin bin and dismissal.”
The referee said he explained his decision and that the player then responded by saying: “That’s bulls**t” and it was claimed by the official that Mr James then approached him in a threatening manner.
The report said that Mr James threatened him saying “I will knock you out you silly c***” before the club secretary told him and his team-mate to leave him alone and go away.
The referee told the FA that he felt Mr James was “trying to provoke a reaction and had the secretary not intervened he would have carried on trying to intimidate him.”
In the FA’s evidence, following the referee’s submission, it was stated that: “(The referee) put his hands up to avoid there being any contact between them. But having put his hands up, that is when Mr James made contact with him.”
Mr James responded to the claims via his club.
He had questioned a decision made by the referee during the game which had led to him being sin-binned and then red-carded after he said “the decision was shocking”, which he said “was just a thought out loud.”
The FA published Mr James’ response and it said: “After the match he went to shake the referee’s hand, but he was talking to someone else.
“He heard the referee say that he (Mr James) had told him to f*** off, which he denies.
“He tried to talk to the referee who said that he didn’t want to talk. (Mr James) said ‘I am just being polite’ and wanted to ask about his decision.
“(Mr James) states that the referee then pushed him and said ‘step back, I don’t want to talk to you’.
“In retaliation (Mr James) says that he grabbed the referee’s arm and said ‘don’t do that again coz I’ll put you on your ass’.”
The club secretary Robert Few provided a statement – having been manager during the match – and said he didn’t see the incident but according to the report, told the FA that “the club are not best pleased with our player’s actions towards a match official.”
A club participant added a statement, claiming to have witnessed the post-match confrontation, saying the referee “had a bad attitude” and added that “the referee pushed (Mr James) and told him to go away and basically laughed in his face. At this point (Mr James) retaliated verbally and words were exchanged.”
The applicable standard of proof required for the case is the civil standard of the balance of probability.
The FA’s report said that “by his own admission, (Mr James) grabbed the referee. There was no live evidence to test, but the referee accepts putting his arms and hands up to stop (Mr James) getting close to him.
“Contact was made and it is possible that (Mr James) perceived this to be a push. However, I do not accept that this protective motion by the referee merited (Mr James’) reaction.”
The FA’s charge of improper conduct against a match official was proven. The decision was subject to the right of appeal.
