Written Reasons for Overturn of Dismissal are out
12. Having viewed the available footage of the incident on numerous occasions and in great detail and having considered the Club’s submissions, the Regulatory Commission unanimously agreed that the Referee had erred in his interpretation of the incident. Both players were running at speed towards the ball. The Brentford player made a sliding tackle with a straight right leg, attempting to play the ball. His eyes were fixed on the ball and he was in control at all times. It is evident from the video footage that despite the opposing player getting the first touch on the ball, the Brentford player then made contact with the ball which clearly changed direction, going out over the touchline. It is possible that the Referee’s view was obscured at the point of contact. However, it could not be said that the Brentford player used excessive force and brutality in making the challenge.
13. Accordingly, it is the unanimous view of the Regulatory Commission that the Referee was in fact incorrect to dismiss the player pursuant to the Laws of the Game.
14. The Regulatory Commission acknowledged the importance of the referee making his decision at the exact time the offence was committed and his judgment at that point. Equally, it is not the role of Regulatory Commission to re-referee the incident.
15. The Appeal is therefore upheld.
