February 2024 Roundup
A roundup of notable football law news and decisions from February 2024:
Marco Da Silva fined £80,000
Fulham FC’s manager Marco Da Silva (“MS”) has been fined £80,000 for comments he made to the media in post-match interviews following Fulham FC’s 3-0 defeat to Newcastle United FC on 16 December 2023.
MS was charged by the FA for a breach of the FA Rules, r. E3.1, it being alleged that MS’s comments constituted ‘improper conduct in that they imply bias and/or question the integrity of, and/or are insulting towards the Match Official (Referee) and/or the Video Assistant Referee, and/or bring the game into disrepute’. MS’s comments are set out in paragraph 6 of the Regulatory Commissions written reasons.
The charge proceeded under the FA’s Disciplinary Regulations, Part E – Fast Track Regulations, Fast Track 2, as the charge related to ‘media comments’ (see definition in Table 10 found in FA’s Disciplinary Regulations, Part E – Fast Track Regulations / pg. 240 of the FA Handbook).
MS admitted the charge (see paragraph 7 of the written reasons).
The Regulatory Commission applied the usual reasonable bystander test (see paragraphs 17(ii)-(iv) and 24 of the written reasons), finding that the reasonable bystander would interpret MS’s comments as implying bias and questioning the integrity of the Match Referee or VAR in Fulham FC’s match against Newcastle United FC.
In mitigation, the Regulatory Commission accepted MS’s submissions that his comments lacked malice and were made ‘at a time when he remained frustrated by the result of the match and [were] his own subjective assessment of the officiating by the match officials’ (see paragraphs 50-52 of the written reasons). The Regulatory Commission also noted that MS admitted the charge and had apologised for his conduct (see paragraphs 57 and 59 of the written reasons). Conversely, the Regulatory Commission noted that MS had breached FA Rules, r. E3.1 on five occasions in the last 12 months (all arising from an incident during Fulham FC’s match against Manchester United FC on 19 March 2023, and discussed in this Football Law article ‘Marco Da Silva and Aleksander Mitrovic Provide Key Case’). The Regulatory Commission noted that one of those previous breaches related to comments made by MS that expressed bias and questioned the integrity of Match Officials, and that the same was a significant aggravating factor in this case (see paragraphs 65-74 of the written reasons).
Balancing all the above, the Regulatory Commission considered a fine of £80,000 as the proportionate sanction, although it was noted that ‘should [MS] appear before a Regulatory Commission in the future facing similar misconduct charges, with his documented history of such offending media comments, [… then] a sporting sanction will inevitably become increasingly necessary and proportionate’ (see paragraphs 80 and 87 of the written reasons)
Chris Wilder fined £11,500
In a similar vein, Sheffield United FC’s manager Chris Wilder (“CW”) has been fined £11,500 for comments he made about officials following his side’s defeat to Crystal Palace FC on 30 January 2023. CW was found to be in breach of FA Rule, r. E3.1. No written reasons have been released at the time of this article being published (presumably as the same have not been requested pursuant to the FA’s Disciplinary Regulations, Part E – Fast Track Regulations, Fast Track 2, para. 36). You can watch CW’s post-match interview here.
Paul Pogba banned for four years for anti-doping rule violation
Paul Pogba (“PP”) has been banned from football for four years following a charge against PP being proven in respect of a urine sample PP provided testing positive for the presence of non-endogenous testosterone metabolites.
As explained in this thread on Football Law’s X account, a four-year ban is the standard sanction for an anti-doping rule violation of this nature. It appears that PP has been unsuccessful in establishing that his ADRV was unintentional in an attempt to reduce the period of ineligibility.
PP has indicated that he will appeal the Tribunale Nazionale Antidoping’s decision to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (see articles 13.1 and 13.2 of WADA’s World Anti-Doping Code 2021).
Kian Harratt suspended for four months and fined £3,200
Huddersfield Town FC player Kian Harratt has been given a four-month suspension and fined £3,200 for 484 breaches of the FA Betting Rules.
Football Law’s Thomas Horton acted for Kian Harratt and was instructed by Phil Hutchinson and Harry Bambury of Mills & Reeve LLP. This article from Mr Hutchinson and Mr Bambury provides a helpful summary and explanation of the Regulatory Commission’s decision.
Blackburn Rovers FC and Duncan Maguire’s registration
The EFL Board has upheld the EFL Executive’s decision to reject Blackburn Rovers FC’s (“BRFC”) application to register Duncan McGuire (“DM”) from Orlando City SC.
DM was set to join BRFC on loan during the January registration period. BRFC explained to the EFL Board that although all relevant documents had been uploaded to the registration system, the documents were not submitted by the deadline of 11pm on 1 February 2024.
BRFC requested a review of the Executive’s decision, but the EFL Board decided that the EFL Executive had correctly applied the EFL Regulations and associated Guidance (see EFL Regulations, reg. 44, 46, 47 and 57); ‘the upload of documents to a draft application area did not constitute sending documents to the EFL’.
Everton FC succeed in appeal against ten-point deduction
On 26 February 2024, it was announced that Everton Football Club (“EFC”) had succeeded in its appeal against a Premier League Commission’s decision to sanction EFC with an immediate ten-point deduction for EFC’s breach of the Premier League’s Profitability and Sustainability Rules (“PSR”) (found in section E of the Premier League Rules) for the period ending season 2021/22.
The Appeal Board’s decision identified that EFC succeeded on two of its nine grounds of appeal (referred to as grounds one and seven in the Appeal Board’s written reasons) and, consequently, that the Appeal Board set aside the Commission’s decision on sanction and imposed an immediate six-point deduction.
An article analysing the Appeal Board’s decision will be published on Football Law soon.
Reading FC and Yongge Dai
An EFL Disciplinary Commission has, again, sanctioned Reading FC (“RFC”) and Yongge Dai, the owner of RFC.
For a history of the ongoing issues at RFC, readers are invited to start with Football Law’s January 2024 Roundup, and follow the links to articles and other monthly roundups contained therein.
In this latest decision, RFC has been sanctioned for sums owed to HMRC in breach of EFL Regulations, reg. 52.6.2 The sanction imposed on RFC was an immediate two-point deduction and a further two-point deduction suspended on condition that there is no further breach of EFL Regulations, reg. 52.6.1-52.6.3 before the end of the 2023/24 season (see para. 42(a) of the written reasons).
Further, Mr Dai has been sanctioned for his continued non-compliance with an EFL Disciplinary Commission’s decision dated 15 August 2023 requiring Mr Dai to deposit an amount equal to 125% of RFC’s then-forecast monthly wage bill within 28 days. The sanction imposed on Mr Dai was (i) a £100,000 fine payable within 21 days; (ii) a further £100,000 fine activated if Mr Dai fails to comply with the 15 August 2023 decision within 28 days; and (iii) a further £100,000 fine activated if Mr Dai fails to comply with the 15 August 2023 decision within 35 days (see para. 42(b) of the written reasons).
Nottingham Forest FC PSR charge
As explained in Football Law’s January 2024 Roundup, Nottingham Forest FC (“NFFC”) has been charged for a breach of the PSR for sustaining losses above the permitted threshold for the assessment period ending season 2022/23.
It has been reported (£) that the hearing of this charge against NFFC is being heard on 7-8 March 2024, with the decision to be released by 15 April 2024 (see Premier League Rules, r. E.53.2 and Appendix 1 – Profitability and Sustainability Rules – Standard Directions).
Premier League agree change to Associated Party Transactions
It has been reported that the Premier League has amended its rules relating to Associated Party Transactions (as defined in Premier League Rules, r. A.1.24 and addressed in r. E.55-E.71) to ‘limit the ability of teams to buy players or strike sponsorship deals with parties related to their ownership’. At the time of this article being published, the Premier League Rules have not been updated to identify what changes have been made.
UEFA statutes amended – increase of female Committee members and declaration to protect European model
Amendments to the UEFA statutes were approved at the 48th Ordinary UEFA Congress held on 8 February at La Maison de la Mutualité in Paris. A notable change included an amendment to article 19(3) of the UEFA Statutes, which increases the minimum number of women on the UEFA Executive Committee to two. The Executive Committee, which is made up of twenty members (see Football Law’s UEFA overview for a full explanation of its composition and function), previously only required a minimum of one female member.
Additionally, European Union sports ministers shared their support of and commitment to protecting the European sports model by a joint declaration that references the need to maintain the ‘link between annual performance in domestic competitions and all European competitions’. The joint declaration indicates the EU’s approach going forward, which will likely be incorporated into the EU mandate 2024-2029 and the new EU Work Plan on Sport 2024-2027. This approach aims to prevent breakaway, closed competitions, such as the controversial European Super League. At the same time, UEFA also emphasised its commitment to the European sports model.
This article was written with Claire Errington of 3 Hare Court Chambers.
5 March 2024