Peterhead have expressed disappointment after Simon Ferry’s appeal over a red card against Cove Rangers failed.
The midfielder was given a straight red card by referee Peter Stuart midway through the first half of last weekend’s game at the Balmoral Stadium, with his appeal thrown out by a Scottish FA judicial panel.
Ferry tripped Mitch Megginson in a wide position just inside the Peterhead half and there was confusion as to what offence he had been sent off for.
The Blue Toon were disappointed to discover Ferry’s challenge was deemed violent conduct – defined in IFAB’s law of the game as “when a player uses or attempts to use excessive force or brutality against an opponent when not challenging for the ball” – and were frustrated it was Tuesday before they were notified as to why he had been sent off.
They were also frustrated with Stuart’s description of the incident in his evidence to the appeal tribunal.
Manager Jim McInally said: “After reading the referee’s response myself and Simon felt we couldn’t let him talk about that incident in that manner and Simon actually paid for the appeal out of his own pocket.
“We appealed hoping somebody who knows football to a certain extent would see it wasn’t as bad as described.
“After reading what the referee said you would have expected Simon to have been arrested on Saturday night.
“Ultimately the appeal was thrown out as the camera footage wasn’t conclusive in our favour.
“I can go back to two tackles I saw last Saturday – Shane Duffy’s challenge on Ryan Kent and Shaun Byrne for Dundee on Steven Naismith, and both were worse than Simon’s and they were both booked.
“We thought we would appeal it on the grounds that somebody would look at it and see it was a professional foul that happens in football.
“After reading what the referee had said we were realistic enough to know it was a long shot.”
Peterhead general manager Martin Johnston added: “We don’t feel clubs should be finding out 48 hours or 72 hours after the event as to why a player has been sent off. That means we could be ill-prepared to submit an appeal, because we do not know what we are appealing against.
“There was confusion as to why it was a sending-off offence, then – much to our surprise – we found out it was for violent conduct.
“Our player is aghast that the view is that he deliberately sought out his opponent to attack him. The report painted a different picture that wasn’t reflected in the video footage.
“We’re disappointed, but not surprised, at the final outcome – but we still don’t think it was violent conduct and we completely disagree with the terminology used.”
