So, the FA have upheld their initial decision and decided to ban both Wayne Rooney and Paul Scholes for three Premiership matches following their sendings off against Porto in the Amsterdam tournament a fortnight ago.
Ignoring the incidents which led to these red cards (Rooney's in particular) the decision to ban them is an absolute disgrace and yet more evidence of the lack of consistency the FA displays and their nonsensical desire to make examples of certain high profile clubs and players.
If you get a red card in an international match, you are banned for a number of international fixtures. If you get a red card in the Champions League, you are banned for a number of European games. So, someone explain to me how a red card in a meaningless pre-season friendly match, against Portuguese opposition, can lead to a three match domestic ban? Surely the most appropriate and logical punishment is a ban for a number of friendly matches? And seeing as the opposition was Porto, perhaps at a push a ban for some European games.
This is all notwithstanding the fact that, for example, Liverpool's Neil Mellor was sent off in the very same Amsterdam tournament in 2003 and received no ban at all. Or how Sheffield United's Ade Akinbiyi was sent off the day after Rooney and Scholes in a friendly match against Sparta Rotterdam and also received no domestic ban.
I am not sure that is is some sort of FA anti-United vendetta, and I am not sure that Rooney throwing his toys out of the pram with the FA is necessarily the best response but I just cannot understand the rationale behind this decision. It strikes me as yet another example of the bungling ineptitude of the FA who couldn't make a consistent decision if their lives depended on it. Sooner or later someone needs to take a grip of the rules of the game and starting treating clubs and individuals fairly and with consistency and not just making an example out of a big name player or club to make themselves look clever.