Eden Hazard has today been formally charged with “violent conduct” with the FA taking the extra measure of stating that the “standard punishment that would otherwise apply was clearly insufficient.”
Hazard automatically serves a three-match ban for the red card received in the midweek tie at Swansea but will now likely face further sanctions. The FA have confirmed to us that an extension of the ban is a possibility. Hazard has until 6pm on Tuesday next week to appeal the charge.
Owned by 22% of managers in the Fantasy Premier League game and over 39% of managers in the Sky Sports game, Hazard remains a big player in Fantasy terms. In addition to this weekend’s FA Cup clash at Brentford, he will also miss league matches with Reading and Newcastle and must now decide on an appeal or await a fate that could well see his suspension extended to further league outings.
For those who want to lose themselves in the rulings surrounding this case, we’ve had it confirmed to us by the FA that the procedure below is now in place in Hazard’s case. Taken from the FA Handbook (p 370-372), there’s a couple of points of interest here, namely that Hazard could have the ban extended based on “the prevalence of the type of offence in question in football generally” and in order to protect “the wider interests of football in applying consistent punishments for dismissal offences”. The final point listed below also makes it clear that Hazard can only face an extension of the existing ban and not a fine.
Charges brought under this Regulation shall be determined based on video and/or DVD and written evidence only. The Match Officials, Club and Player are not entitled to be present or represented at the Regulatory Commission.
If the Regulatory Commission decides that a charge brought under this Regulation has been proved, the Commission shall then consider only whether the standard punishment should be imposed, or whether that punishment should be increased.
The standard punishment shall be increased where The Association satisfies the Commission so that it is sure that:
(i) The circumstances of the dismissal under review are truly exceptional, such that the standard punishment should not be applied; and
(ii) The standard punishment would be clealy insufficient.In considering the matters at (g) above, the Commission shall have regard to:
(a) The applicable Law(s) of the Game and any relevant FIFA instructions and/or guidelines;
(b) The nature of the dismissal offence, and particular any intent, recklessness, negligence or other state of mind of the Player;
(c) Where applicable, the level of force used;
(d) Any injury to an opponent caused by the dismissal offence;
(e) Any other impact on the game in which the dismissal occurred;
(f) The prevalence of the type of offence in question in football generally;
(g) The wider interests of football in applying consistent punishments for dismissal offences;
(i) If the Commission is not satisfied of the matters at above, the Commission shall deliberate no further on the charge and the Player shall serve the standard punishment;If the Commission is satisfied of the matters at above, the standard punishment set out in the Memorandum shall be withdrawn, and the Commission shall then consider, having regard to the matters above, the level of punishment that should apply.
Any punishment imposed by the Commission shall be limited to a suspension from playing a specified number of matches in addition to the standard punishment applicable to the relevant dismissal. The Commission shall not impose any other punishment on the Player.
