Howe out for more than a month!

[CP Gull]

Unfortunately, as already mentioned in other threads, Howe will now be missing for FOUR games (not three as indicated on the OS) as Saturday's was his second red card of the season - following on from the one he got at Shrewsbury.

Seems an incredibly harsh penalty to me for what wasn't much more than a bad (but not reckless) challenge, but those are the rules and so not only will he miss the Swindon(h), Oxford(h) and Plymouth (a) games but he will also miss the Macclesfield(a) game on the 14th January (our next game after Plymouth) given that we now have a free weekend on the 7th January as D&R are involved in the 3rd Round of the FA Cup - so the cold stark facts are that Rene Howe will now miss OVER A MONTH of football!!! Not being able to play again until Saturday 21st January when we visit one of his old clubs Morecambe.

Whilst it's inevitable that Atieno will be given his chance to fill the gap, surely it would now make good sense for us to bring in a loan striker as soon as the transfer window re-opens? If anything should happen to Atieno we don't really have a "proper" centre forward at the club as I really don't think that role suits McPhee. Not sure whether it's even possible to get one in and registered to play before the Plymouth game but the sooner we do the better I think.

[royalgull]

Atieno you'd presume will get his chance over the next 2 games, Ling didn't change the system when O Kane or Mansell was missing so I don't expect him to now Howe is missing. He'll go for Atieno first and if he has a bad game or whatever might go for McPhee. If it's not good enough over these next 2 games I think there is a chance of a loan player coming in and offering more options.

He could also play Bodin as the out and out striker and bring Morris into the wide position. He does have a few options within the squad which he obviously has to use first because even if he wants to he can't sign anyone permanent or loan until the day before Argyle away.

[AlexGulls]

Surely its worth appealing? If only so he's avalible for the Swindon game. I still dont think it deserved a red card.

[tufc si]

Surely its worth appealing? If only so he's avalible for the Swindon game. I still dont think it deserved a red card.

Not sure if it's me talking rubbish, but doesnt the ban get extended if an appeal is launched but fails?...

[AustrianAndyGull]

I think if its considered a 'frivolous' appeal then that can happen but if there is any obvious element of doubt then i think the ban remains the same ( unless the appeal is successful obviously and the ban is reduced ). I'm not sure what constitutes a 'frivolous' appeal though, its a grey area.

[cambgull]

There wouldn't be much point appealing the ban, lets face it, he pretty much stamped on the guy's nuts.

A 'frivilous' appeal can extend the ban, however, the term 'frivilous' is a pretty vague area (much like the vast majority of the rules in the footballing rule book). It just seems to be a term used so they can extend the ban whenever they want but allowing the FA to not extend the ban for their favourite teams, like Arsenal.

[Gullscorer]

I've watched the incident again and again. It was a complete accident; never a foul. The club should appeal.

[Southampton Gull]

I've watched the incident again and again. It was a complete accident; never a foul. The club should appeal.

Just because it wasn't intentional doesn't mean it wasn't a foul. No appeal will be forthcoming.

[Gulliball]

Well according to our very own FA, deliberately kicking someone out of frustration isn't worthy of a three match ban, so perhaps we'll be the first club to benefit from their recent change of heart? Anything more than two games would be a huge injustice.

Or maybe it really is one rule for them and one for the rest of us.

[cambgull]

Well according to our very own FA, deliberately kicking someone out of frustration isn't worthy of a three match ban, so perhaps we'll be the first club to benefit from their recent change of heart? Anything more than two games would be a huge injustice.

Or maybe it really is one rule for them and one for the rest of us.

Very good point actually. Perhaps its worth an appeal for this alone, they wouldn't really have any excuse not to reduce the ban.