Tonev... alleged racist abuse (7 match ban)

[UK Redsox]

Tonev loses appeal

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/30496680

[Gareth]

Be interesting to see Villa's response to this....don't know the content of what was alleged to have been said but from the Celtic response it appears that the judgement is based on "he said - no I didn't" with no witnesses.  Normally I would say the governing body convicting you of racist abuse would be an instant sackable offence but this sits a little uncomfortably unless the guilty by probability has more substance than Logan looks more trustworthy than Tonev

[Malandro]

I don't see how you can ban somebody from football for such a thing unless they are charged and convicted by police/courts.

[frank black]

[2] Mr O'Donnell duly appeared with the appellant at the hearing on 30 October which we understand lasted seven hours. The crucial question for the three-man Judicial Panel was whether, following a heavy challenge by the black Aberdeen player, Shaleum Logan, and further contact with him by Logan's arm, the appellant abused Logan by calling him a "black c***". Evidence was given by these two players, the referee, the Aberdeen captain, Mark Reynolds, the Aberdeen manager, Derek McInnes, and the Celtic assistant manager, John Collins. The panel also had before them the referee's report of having the matter drawn to his attention, the statements of Logan, Reynolds and McInnes, and the statement of the Aberdeen Football Operations Manager, Steven Gunn. In addition they viewed four video clips reflecting events in the match.

[UK Redsox]

From the above, we now know that several people gave evidence. However, it doesn't say what evidence they gave.

[Richard E]

When this first blew up Michael Colvin in the Independent on Sunday was making out that any Villa fan who wanted Tonev sacked was only saying it because he's a rubbish player, which I thought was out of order.

[lovejoy]

Without the evidence presented we cannot make a value judgement unless we have faith in the footballing authorities. The FA consider Dowd a top referee and found Shearer did not lump Lennon in the face.

[Flamingo Lane]

When this first blew up Michael Colvin in the Independent on Sunday was making out that any Villa fan who wanted Tonev sacked was only saying it because he's a rubbish player, which I thought was out of order.

What?  You think he's not a rubbish player?

[Richard E]

When this first blew up Michael Colvin in the Independent on Sunday was making out that any Villa fan who wanted Tonev sacked was only saying it because he's a rubbish player, which I thought was out of order.

What?  You think he's not a rubbish player?

I didn't like the insinuation that we wouldn't be bothered about him being a racist if he was any good. I don't actually know why he is a sports reporter as he doesn't seem to like anything about sport.

[Malandro]

Is this the end of the matter?

[paul_e]

[2] Mr O'Donnell duly appeared with the appellant at the hearing on 30 October which we understand lasted seven hours. The crucial question for the three-man Judicial Panel was whether, following a heavy challenge by the black Aberdeen player, Shaleum Logan, and further contact with him by Logan's arm, the appellant abused Logan by calling him a "black c***". Evidence was given by these two players, the referee, the Aberdeen captain, Mark Reynolds, the Aberdeen manager, Derek McInnes, and the Celtic assistant manager, John Collins. The panel also had before them the referee's report of having the matter drawn to his attention, the statements of Logan, Reynolds and McInnes, and the statement of the Aberdeen Football Operations Manager, Steven Gunn. In addition they viewed four video clips reflecting events in the match.

See what I struggle with in this case is look at the list of people giving evidence, other than the 2 players what can any of them really offer given that none of them actually heard anything?  It seems as if the main reasoning here is 'why would Logan lie?' which I find rather uncomfortable, I just don't see how a case like this can be based on anything other than hard evidence.  it feels a little bit like the SFA have pinned him as an easy target to show how tough they are on racism without having much to build a case around.

It'll be interesting to see what happens from here, I wouldn't be surprised, unless there is some evidence that the press aren't reporting, if this one carries on up to CAS, it seems to be a case full of holes right now, once again, unless there's something a lot more compelling than has been reported.

[OCD]

From the above, we now know that several people gave evidence. However, it doesn't say what evidence they gave.

The article would have been better worded if it had said that several people had provided testimonies. As has been said, there doesn't seem to have been any actual evidence that categorically proves any misdoing.