Thanks. So there you go. Our fine completely over the top compared to what Chelsea received.
Do you know when our first two offences occurred and how much we were punished GL? I'm assuming one was the WBA away game?
I have just searched a bit more on the FA website, and my findings rankle somewhat :
Firstly the reason cited for the significant fine both clubs have been given is as follows :
Prior to this fixture, Chelsea had breached FA Rule E20 on four separate occasions and Tottenham Hotspur twice since November 2014.
So this is actually Chelsea's
FIFTH charge in this timeframe, not their fourth :
Chelsea v Everton Feb 2015 : Chelsea fined £30k
Arse v Chelsea Sep 2015. Chelsea fined £40k
WH v Chelsea Oct 2015 . Chelsea fined £50k
Chelsea v WBA Jan 2016 Chelsea fined £65k
And for us :
Villa v Spurs Nov 2014 : Spurs fined £20k
WBA v Spurs Dec 2015 : Spurs fined £25k
So we have one incident a season, they have 3 in one season, plus 1 from the season before.
Chelsea's 3rd offence resulted in a £50k fine, ours a £225k fine! Not exactly equivalence.
In the report from the WH/Chelsea game, the FA take into account similar charges in a
12 month period. (And incidentally WH had 3 charges in the preceding 12 months, and got a £40k fine).
In the report from the Arse v Chelsea game, the same benchmark of
12 months is again applied in terms of previous charges.
For the WBA v Spurs game, WBA got a higher fine, because of a charge faced in the previous
12 months.
So why, for the Chelsea v Spurs game, is the timeframe moved back so far - 18 months? If one were cynical, one might think it just to be able to quote two previous occurrences.
There is a further explanation for the amount of the fine in that the charges in relation to the Chelsea v Spurs game were in respect of 3 charges of failing to control. The others listed above are most likely just 1 charge (I have looked at some of them, but not all). Another finding :
In the Arse v Chelsea, report, the referee has reported 3 separate incidents, although all happening close together. The FA decides to treat these in the totality of one charge (and with a low level of seriousness).
It does feel that we have been stitched up here.
I am sure it would make very interesting reading to look through some of these reports in more detail and compare the findings. However I risk facing a disciplinary charge of my own soon if I don't get back to doing some work!