GRAHAM POLL: Why Yaya was let off the hook for his kick but Bellamy is now facing a three-match ban... and the secret gang of three who decide the fate of the Premier League stars

Poll Are The FA right to let Yaya Toure off the hook? Yes No Are The FA right to let Yaya Toure off the hook? Yes 4736 votes

No 5477 votes Now share your opinion





Craig Bellamy being charged for violent conduct and Yaya Toure escaping sanction has left many players, managers and fans baffled by the FA’s perceived inconsistency and some have accused them of ‘big club bias’.



Much of the anger and confusion comes from not knowing how these decisions are reached. I can now explain how the process works.

VIDEO Scroll down to watch Jose Mourinho: Yaya should be suspended



The one that got away: Manchester City's Yaya Toure escaped retrospective punishment for kicking out at Norwich striker Ricky van Wolfswinkel

And the one that didn't: Cardiff forward Craig Bellamy (L) was charged with a three-game ban for trying to hit Swansea's Jonathan de Guzman

● Anyone — a club official, a referee, a fan — can alert the FA to an incident they feel should be punished but the officials missed. This applies to the top four divisions.



● When a complaint is made to the FA, they look for footage of the alleged incident and then refer it to a panel of three former Premier League referees: Steve Dunn, Alan Wiley and Eddie Wolstenholme.



● The referee who missed the incident is not part of the process.



● The three ex-referees do not sit together or confer. The video is posted on a secure website and the panel each use a password at home to access the clips.



● Each then reply to the FA, stating whether, if they had been the referee and seen the incident as they have on the replay, they would have taken no action, shown a yellow card or sent the player off.



● Only in cases where all three men state that they would have dismissed the player do the FA then charge the offender. The members of the panel do not know how the other two voted but can obviously tell that the other two have also said it should be a red card if the player is charged.

Judge No 1: Steve Dunn Jude No 2: Alan Wiley Judge no 3: Eddie Wolstenholme

Caught in the act: All three judges will have to have voted to charge Craig Bellamy after watching secure video footage

Inconclusive: Yaya Toure escaped punishment because at least one judge thought his actions didn't deserve a suspension

Incredibly, there have only been six incidents reviewed so far this season, including the Bellamy and Toure cases.



Clearly then, all three must have said they would have dismissed Bellamy for his off-the-ball, premeditated strike on Jonathan De Guzman while at least one and possibly all three said that Toure’s offence should either only warrant a yellow card or, less likely, no action.



There are pros and cons with this system. If you want complete consistency then all reviews should be made by the same person.



If you want a balanced view then the system offers that. However, if one of the panel has a particularly lenient view of player discipline then he could, of course, always vote for a yellow card or no action.



Right decision: West Ham striker Andy Carroll's ban for a clash with Swansea's Chico Flores (top) was different because referee Howard Webb acted at the time

I hope the FA checks to ensure this is not the case. I think the panel works, as only serious cases of misconduct result in a charge. Any that are unclear or divide opinion are likely to be dismissed.



So what about Andy Carroll? He fell into a different category as the referee, Howard Webb, did see the incident and acted. For that to be overturned West Ham would have had to prove a clear and obvious error by the referee, which they could not.

