Nicolas Anelka will not appeal five-match ban over 'quenelle' gesture

West Bromwich Albion striker Nicolas Anelka will not appeal against his five-match ban for an anti-Semitic goal celebration.

Nicholas Anelka has been banned for five matches
Nicolas Anelka has been banned for five matches

The FA has also decided not to appeal for a longer suspension, meaning Anelka’s ban will start with Albion’s trip to Swansea on Saturday.

The 34-year-old will find out next week whether he has a future with the Baggies when the club completes its own internal inquiry.

Anelka was banned for five matches by an independent commission, which ruled that his celebration at West Ham on December 28 was anti-Semitic.

The commission decided, however, that Anelka was not an anti-Semite and did not intend to promote anti-Semitism with his gesture so imposed the minimum ban.

Both Anelka and the FA had until today to lodge appeals but neither party has opted to do so.

FA director of football governance and regulation Darren Bailey said: “We acknowledge the careful consideration taken by the independent regulatory commission of the difficult arguments placed before it.

See also: West Brom suspend Nicolas Anelka after five-match ban over 'quenelle' gesture

“Its decision makes it absolutely clear that use of this gesture on the football pitches of England will not be tolerated in any circumstance.

“Having now considered very carefully the written reasons of the independent regulatory commission together with our appointed QC, we do not consider there is a real prospect of successfully appealing to extend the sanction imposed.

“The grounds of appeal available to us are limited to legal challenges or to circumstances in which the sanction imposed is ‘so unduly lenient as to be unreasonable.’ That is a high test.

“Whilst The FA pressed the independent regulatory commission to impose a harsher sanction on Nicolas Anelka than a suspension of five matches, it is not so far outside the range of sanctions that would have been appropriate in this case to be properly described as unreasonable.

“With confirmation that both parties will not be appealing, Nicolas Anelka will serve out his suspension during this season. We also welcome his confirmation the gesture will not be repeated.”

Comments for: "Nicolas Anelka will not appeal five-match ban over 'quenelle' gesture"

RichBaggie

Blog

=-=-=

Excellent news.

Can we sack him now then?

End of Blog

=-=-=-=-=-=

Jack the Hat

Rich,

As Roy admonished " Be careful what you wish for ".

We need every hand on deck over the rest of this season, can't let anyone go at this time. Even the char lady has had to forgo her holiday.

BOING~~~~BOING~~~~J♣H.

BrierleyHillOriginalBaggie

So it's now up to kick it up or the lawyers

Let's see what happens next!!

Jack the Hat

BrierleyHillOriginal,

I haven't heard anything from " Kick it Out " against Sol Campbell's racist slander of the Managers of England during his international career, which was written in his autobiography. Have they decided to disband?, maybe their justice has only one side.

BOING~~~~BOING~~~~J♣H.

JtH, he was on Newsnight (Tuesday I think?) attempting to justify those remarks.

Didn't work though.

We Only Need One Half!

Anelka 1 v Jewish Pressure Groups, Stacked Biased Media Coverage and some insanely jealous Wulfies, Nil

“The grounds of appeal available to us are limited to legal challenges or to circumstances in which the sanction imposed is ‘so unduly lenient as to be unreasonable.’

It was the 'minimum' possible sentence???? if you cant show that was "unduly lenient" why not just admit you were wrong to bring the charge in the first place, and that sentence was more about saving the F.A., the Media and Jewish Pressure Groups red faces than justice.

I had hoped he would have appealed this, but then thats easy to say when its not personally costing you 1/4 of Million of your own money each time.

So after all the protestations this week it was to lenient, it would appear the F.A.s earlier reported plea of "we wont appeal if you don't" has come to fruition

And before any hate filled wulfies decide to come on spouting their libelous comments, that they would never have the guts to do if they thought there was even the remotest chance they could be sued, ergo, keyboard kommandos, if you tell me what part of "The commission decided, however, that Anelka was not an anti-Semite and did not intend to promote anti-Semitism with his gesture so imposed the minimum ban." you are failing to grasp, and I will do my best to explain it to you.

CantelloRocket 78

WONOH,

reading the F.A. Spokesmans' comments, it conjures up images of an Headmaster determined to severly punish a schoolkid, only to find he's made himself look like a right Donkey's rear end, so he shouts at the kid 'consider yourself suitably punished, and don't do it again!!' in front of the whole school in order to salvage some sliver of pride-

but the kids know the truth, and just loff at the Head behind his back-

Just replace 'F.A.Spokesman' with Headmaster Ted Ray in 'Carry On Teacher', or Will Hay in 'Boys will Be Boys'........lol.

We Only Need One Half!

CR, I have actually been in this situation myself, whilst in the Army I found myself 'tapping the boards' (on a charge) for something I had not done, and that I knew they couldn't prove, but only down to my good fortune that had worded the initial charge wrongly. If they had worded it the way the Anelka one was, I would have been buggered.

After successfully arguing my position I was told by the adjudicating officer that the charge was admonished, he asked me if I understood what this meant, to which I replied no, he then went on to explain it was the lowest judgement they could give when a case could not be proven, but he then went on to stress this did not mean I was not guilty????

As a 18 year old seriously looking at the prospect of 6 months hard time in Colchester, with a dishonorable discharge to follow, I was only too glad to accept them doing 'me' a favour.

Nowadays, bit older, bit wiser,if I found myself in a similar situation I wouldn't be such a wimp, and I would take their ass for every penny I could.

Oh yeah, I can spot a Kanagroo Court when I see one.

Jackett the Hat

What's all the fuss about.........we had a great time at Colchester......6 hours hard drinking.

CantelloRocket 78

Jackett-

when you have to watch two third division clubs playing each other, in a game of 'kick and run' up the pitch, with lumps of turf flyin' around, and temporary blindness caused by watching the ball trying to hit the floodlights, then getting 'tanked up' before the game no doubt makes it less painful to witness.....

Jack the Hat

One Half,

Your adjudicating ( Agitating ) officer didn't know the meaning of " Admonish ", just as the commission didn't know what a Quenelle was. Irony or what mate.

BOING~~~~BOING~~~~J♣H.

We Only Need One Half!

Jackett, I would love to see you in the Colchester I refer too, it would clear your sinuses thats for sure!

Help me out here Bully, what is the re offending rate for someone released from a civvy nick?

Colchester its (or it was at the time) 2%, because once you have had a taste of a Army Prison you really, really don't want to go back.

The Real Bully Hoo.

WONOH.

Can't help you out on that one but from time to time we'd have squaddies who'd been in the glasshouse before being found guilty in a court of a criminal charge come to us.

They were a dream to deal with, as soon as you put the key in the lock they would jump to attention at the back of the cell and stay like that until told to move. Their cells were always spotless bed pack neatly folded. This was because where they'd come from anything less would have got them a short sharp shock.

I doubt you got too many asking to go in the glasshouse.

PS.

I've never yet met a serious drinker that felt the need to boast about it.

CantelloRocket 78

Bully,

'6 hours hard drinking' means you haven't got the stomach to swallow a whole pint of beer, so you put lemonade or a dash of lime in it, and sip very slowly........

ELDERVO

Half Pint

Bit of a daft argument about re-offending rates I would have thought. Wouldn't offenders in military nicks usually get kicked out and hence any further indecretions be dealt with outside of the military ?

However, having spent time in civvy nicks (Stafford) and no, not as an offender before you ask but working under ROSPA auditing their Health Safety and Environmental systems, what I would say is that imo the conditions compared with what you suggest the military operate are little deterent against re-offending.

Cant

At least we were playing kick and RUN football rather than kick then stand around watching. Now, of course, we are playing the sort of football that will rip your geriatric, static midfield and defence apart next season....

...and as for your forwards, well, the fact that many on here are awaiting Anelka's potential return as the best bet to provide the firepower to keep you up speaks volumes. ;-)

UTW

The Real Bully Hoo.

The difference is that clubs in our league play in the Champions League whereas clubs in your league play in the Johnstones Paint Trophy.

If you can't see the difference now you will next season, if you get up that is.

CantelloRocket 78

Derv-

ha, ha.....no wonder you're always answering on behalf of 'Jackett', you two have a lot in common-

both of yer are obsessed with reading and posting on the Baggies site, and when you see something you don't like you both have a hissy fit - ahhh, shame, diddums.......LOL

It's obvious you're completely rattled, but it's nice to see that familiar dingle arrogance whenever you finally start winning a couple down there........:-)

We Only Need One Half!

Eldorado, sorry, but thats where your wrong, again.

Every Camp has its own Guardhouse/Prison, with half a dozen cells or so, and it is a regular occurrence for soldiers to get anywhere from 7 days, up to 56 days in it, this does not lead to them being automatically discharged.

Colchester is the main Army Prison for what are considered more serious offence's, usually a sentence of 6 months or more would lead to being discharged, and in some cases, they subsequently have to go on to a civvy Prison to do time there too, this would lead to a dishonorable discharge.

Not such a daft argument after all, is it?

Elderado, may I remind your new and improved World beaters who would rip us apart lost to Morecambe this season.

CantelloRocket 78

Clint ( man with no name ),

it's so familiar-

when Albion reached the top flight, every summer the 'usual suspects' from W'ton came over here, arrogantly bragging about them gettin' in the top half of the prem., and the Baggies dropping like a stone-

then every season they went away in a stroppy sulk as we climbed high above them-

this season, they sulked again at how poor they were, now they've won a couple they'm gonna beat the world!!!

So boringly predictable..............lol.

We Only Need One Half!

Truth be told CR I don't know why I bother replying to Elderado (other than the satisfaction of putting him right each time) because when ever I ask him a question such as where are the articles in reply to statements such as this-

ELDERVO

March 11, 2014 7:28 am

Very clever men can also usually read, doesn't all the articles around on Anelka say he's on 80K a week. ?

He scuttles away again.

Jack the Hat

One Half,

Even the commission ( Just like all the other antagonistic, racists ) have not come out with the true meaning of the Quenelle, because they don't blasted know, so I'm sticking with " Anti establishment " mate, that being just to show the injustice of this facial case.

BOING~~~~BOING~~~~J♣H.

We Only Need One Half!

JtH, thats what I always believed to be, and like Cyril once said to me, no one has been able to prove otherwise.

baggiebornandbred

Hollow victory we still lose a very good player for five games, but cant helo think that all of this could of been avoided if anelka what of just im sorry if i caused any offence, thats all it would of really taken

i will never condone what he did but the f.a seem to have searched around in their how to punish players books and drawn a blank, the man was found to have caused offence but without meaning to apply anti-semitic connetations the offence is caused by the realtionship to said comedian

if the fa arent going to appeal give anelka a nice good will task and accept the five game ban at the minute we need every player we can get and as some people seem to have forgotten this is nicolas anelka who at one point was one of the most potent strikers on the planet,

The Real Bully Hoo.

This stinks of the FA admitting that he isn't guilty of what they charged him with and they fell hook line and sinker for the French Government's dirty tricks dept, aided and abetted by various self interest groups..

What they've actually done him for is an inappropriate political gesture while playing in a PL game, which covers a multitude of sins. Robbie Fowler was done for supporting the Merseyside Dockers and this is on a par with that. Had they just charged him with that I'm sure he would have accepted it.

It would be almost impossible for Anelka to appeal against this because the gesture is political even though it's not anti-semitic or racist. There is also the small matter of whether he can afford to throw money away on what could be a futile gesture. He could pursue the FA through the courts for defamation of character but it would be difficult to prove and probably costly enough to bankrupt Bill Gates.

What's wrong and despicable about this whole affair is that a man has been wrongly branded a racist and anti-semitic and his name has been dragged through the mud by self righteous media and yet when push comes to shove no proof has been produced. This isn't my view it's proved by the verdict of what he was found guilty of. No apology has been forthcoming from any the FA or any other quarter but I bet none of them will risk repeating what they've said.

Finally. I'm not defending him for doing it as he was wrong and I'm sure he would agree with that now. But that doesn't mean that he deserves to be branded as a pariah.

bob.williamsfindlay

I agree with the sentiments you express here, TRBH. There was only one logical route for this to go down and hopefully this'll be the end of it.

ManInsider

I think we have had enough of this saga now, lets concentrate on things that matter, like Swansea tomorrow and staying up.

Cyril

MI, Oh how I wish we could. In its own way, this Anelka business has done the club a load of no good. I would bet £10 that WBA will introduce a clause into players' contracts from now on prohibiting all gestures except hand shakes and if they don't they ought to.

I had my very first view, (live), of the sea near Swansea. Pobbles Bay is an absolute glory on a hot, sunny day from the top of the ridge. That was back in 1947 with The Boys Brigade. If there is a Heaven, it ought to look like that.

We Only Need One Half!

Alrite Cyril, did you see what appeared to be one of The Borrowers playing a 'violin' at the end of Newsnight last night?

Check it out, fast forward to 45 mins-

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b03y45lt/Newsnight_13_03_2014/

Enjoy!

The Real Bully Hoo.

That Nigel Kennedy's let himself go.

SS

The quenelle gesture is anti-Semitic and cause offence.

I have a question for the Express & Star.

Why does the Express & Star continue to show Nicolas Anelka doing this gesture. The Express & Star knows it causes offence as the Express & Star has reported that it causes offence?

The quenelle gesture is anti-Semitic and cause offence.

I have a question for the Express & Star.

Why does the Express & Star continue to show Nicolas Anelka doing this gesture?

The Express & Star knows it causes offence as the Express & Star has reported that it causes offence

One can only surmise that the Express & Star does not care who they offend as the Express & Star only care about sales.

For a change how about reporting some good that has been done, spread some good news. How silly of me, good news doesn't sell.

Boing Boing.

CantelloRocket 78

SS,

from what I recall, the gist of it is Diuodenne ( if that's his name, I can't remember, and ain't interested in him ) is 'linked' by some to claims of being anti-semitic, so this quenelle ( or pudding ) gesture is 'linked' to him, and Anelka is 'linked' to knowing this Comedian-

that's an awful lot of 'linking', but not much clever 'thinking' from people who got the hump over it...........

Cyril

Rocket, the whole business is now a link ! What of is left to your imagination. The 'comedian' is Dieudonné,

loosely translated could be 'God Given' although that may well be one of his 'jokes'.

I'm supposed to have a well developed sense of humour, if I may quote a Managing Director I once worked for. Now Frankie Boyle has yet to make my mouth move vaguely towards a grin, let alone a smile.

Humour, the indefinable sense.

We Only Need One Half!

The thing is, if we are all to be condemned purely by association, how many of us would be in clink right now?

I don't think I am stretching it to much when I say we all know a Dodgy Dave!

SS

The quenelle gesture is anti-Semitic and cause offence.

I have a question for the Express & Star.

Why does the Express & Star continue to show Nicolas Anelka doing this gesture?

The Express & Star knows it causes offence as the Express & Star has reported that it causes offence

One can only surmise that the Express & Star do not care who they offend as the Express & Star only care about sales.

For a change how about reporting some good that has been done, spread some good news. How silly of me, good news doesn't sell.

Boing Boing.

CantelloRocket 78

SS,

'new talk, new talk, so good you said it twice......'

( apologies to Gerard Kenny, who wrote the original 'New York, New York' song...... :-)

Lakeside

Since you choose to bang on about it, when did you know for certain that the gesture was called "quenelle" and when did you know for certain it was anti-Semitic? The gesture does not offend me. Repeat, the gesture does not offend me.

baggiebornandbred

Anyone think quenelle should be added to the oxford dictionary? Along with selfie its all ive heard this year

RobinBrittain

TRBBH

I think you have covered all the bases with your post at 8.53. One interesting comment from the FA is that they felt that had they increased the suspension and or fine they would have left themselves open to a legal challenge.

One day the FA are going to come unstuck big time when someone really takes them on. It's a pity that it was not Anelka but he himself will know that he has been vindicated and people know that he is not an anti Semite.

I look forward to seeing back in an Albion shirt. God how we need him.

The Real Bully Hoo.

Hi Robin.

Yeah and the man Dieudonne still hasn't been proven to be anti-semitic either but I bet none of the ones calling Anelka and a racist will apologise.

baggiebornandbred

The real difficulty that anyone going against this quenelle gusture will find is that it was created by a french comedian not by a world leader, essentially we could all decide to do something like stand with our arms out and say it means something,

the authorities are trying to prove this is an anti semitic, it is almost impossible when this comedian speaks and says the anti semitic connetations then it is anti semitic but a gusture doesnt prove anything its like a footballer doing the little finger and thumb out hand gusture it doesnt mean anything its just a movement spoken words are what are anti semitic

we have given this comdian more air time than he could of possibly imagined essential the fa have contributed to there our problem, im certain had the fa or french goverment not said anything none of us would be talking about this guy and not giving him the publicity he wants