Perth Glory striker Michael Baird is devastated he’s been labeled a cheater and a diver after the FFA match review panel suspended him for two matches for an act of simulation.
Perth Glory striker Michael Baird is devastated he-s been labeled a cheater and a diver after the FFA match review panel suspended him for two matches for an act of simulation.
“It’s not a clear penalty, but there’s no dive. There’s no simulation involved in it,” Baird said.
“The guy clipped me and I went down. I think it’s been blown up because of how late it happened in the game and Melbourne were desperate for the three points.”
Baird was fouled in the 92nd minute of Sunday’s match against Melbourne Heart with referee Kurt Ams awarding Perth a penalty.
As the club currently seeks legal advice, Baird hopes he will be given the chance to clear his name.
“I do hope the FFA can just look through and give us a chance to appeal, even if they still give me two weeks (after that).
“I think everyone’s got the chance to appeal a sentence, even murderers.
“So hopefully they’ll change their mind and get some more footage, because I don’t know what footage they’re watching because the footage I’ve seen with the club, there’s definitely angles that have shown I got clipped.”
Professional Footballers Australia has backed the striker, saying it-s a ‘denial of natural justice’ and it-s completely unfair to deny a player a right to contest his case before a tribunal.
“Our position is made up very simply of two points. The first one is that we have supported the moves to address simulation within the A-League but we do have very real concerns with a system that does see players penalised without even having the opportunity of a hearing,” PFA chief executive Brendan Schwab said.
“It’s a dangerous system that’s going to rely solely on technology. The two players suspended will face a two-match ban, without even having the opportunity to present their case to an independent panel. We think that’s a denial of natural justice. We think that it relies too much on the technology and we think that FFA should address that.”
“The Match Review Panel now has the power to not only overturn a referee’s decision but to investigate a matter which may have escaped the referee’s attention, charge the player, convict the player and penalise the player without a hearing.
“We think that FFA does not lawfully have the power to do it. If the rules were challenged in court, the challenge would succeed. We fail to understand why FFA has taken the position it has taken,” he said.
