trousers

Yeah... Probably wayward 'thinking out loud' on my part... 🙂

Alas, I fear you're probably correct, even though (in my view) it would illogical to treat them differently, given the EFL rule is nothing to do with the FA. Hence why Bielsa also faced with the same "disrepute" charge, surely? In other words, if a pre-requisite of the FA being able to accuse a manager of "bringing the game into disrepute" is the pre-existence of a rule they've broken in whichever league they happen to be managing in, then how were they able to bring a disrepute charge against Bielsa in the first place? (On reflection, I guess the answer to this is that he was in breach of the lesser EFL 'general misconduct' rule, which pre-dated the spying rule... Bugger... Just blown my own argument out of the water... Probably... )

Which, IIRC, is exactly the same FA charge that Bielsa faced, and got a slap on the wrist (from the FA). I still maintain that the EFL rule change should have nothing to do with how the FA deal with this. Both Bielsa and Eckert "brought the game into disrepute", regardless of what rules the EFL happened to have in place at the time, and that's all the FA should be focusing on. In my humble opinion of course.

Lallana on the touchline with JWP 'coaching' the team on the pitch could be a decent enough caretaker combo...?

Would surprise me if Downes' injury is significant enough to rule him out of this match. Didn't Tonda say in his post-match interview yesterday that Downes picked up a knock in the first minute, yet went on to play the whole first half, and was only then withdrawn as a precaution? If it was a significant injury, then he wouldn't have played the rest of the half, surely...?

And Hull bought a shed load of new premier league level players, didn't they...? Here's hoping Sport Republic are looking and learning, after our last Premier League debacle...

If we were to compare with games that actually matter, the Canadian women's team played the grand total of 3 competive games during their manager's 12 month ban...

I wasn't one of the "bed wetters" but I've added a bit of context to you post to add a bit of fairness...

I agree, but the one thing that doesn't add up to me is that if this is a standard / routine case (in the FA's eyes) then why has it taken them almost a third of a year to come up with a verdict...? My gut instinct is, the longer they take the more punitive the punishment is likely to be.... That said, it could just be the FA are incompetent and/or inefficient at dealing with these type of cases, and it'll be a punishment that's proportionate to the 'standard' level of breach after all... Fingers crossed...

Extended highlights...

Do the laws say he has to be "obstructing" his view to be deemed offside, or does being a distraction count too? (I've no idea, just curious)

Thinking out loud.... I wonder how much of a backlash would there be if the FA were relatively lenient with Eckert and how much will they be taking that into account in their deliberations, either consciously or sub-conciously? "We don't want to dish out a disproportionate punishment but it has to be punitive enough to satisfy everyone else" (?) (Under scrutiny, they'd obviously claim that the wider footballing community reaction doesn't / shouldn't influence their desision, but they would say that, wouldn't they...)

Agreed, but there's one major flaw in your train of thought... You appear to be assuming the FA will deal with this rationally and logically. I admire your optimism...

Pass. No idea.