We recently had discussions on here about the emails that we had sent to David Allison at the Football League about the performance of Mick Russell in our game against Portsmouth.
I know it is all water under the bridge now but i thought i could let you know that i have had a reply from Mr Allisons office.
The response tell me nothing really, it is possibly a "lip service" reply.
The message tells me that the referee sees things from a position on the ground that no-one else has and that he will occasionally make an error of judgement.
Well we all know and acknowledge that but in Mr Russells case it was far worse than that, four glaring errors in about half an hour and all in favour of Pompey.
Anyway, there it is, i thought that some of you may be interested to know that i did at least get a response to my query.
referee Mick Russell
posted on 23/5/12
Yep "G" you got one which is something. But again "How dare you criticise the FA or referees. Just pay your money to watch a team. shut up, mind your own business and do what we tell you to do. Seems that should sum up the to 55 ers at the FA
posted on 23/5/12
Thanks Hound. I also got another reply from the FA. The reason that they copied their rules about social networking sites to me was apparently so I could understand why they had charged JR. They made no comment on the referee's performance though.
posted on 23/5/12
Well done hound
posted on 24/5/12
Hound:
I assume it was very similar to what I got from an Amanda Craig. In her first response she said I'd hear from Mr. Allison. I published her next reply under the original John Ryan thread a few days ago.
posted on 24/5/12
Much the same PDX, as i said earlier, i think it is a reply for the sake of doing a reply.
Nothing of any cosequence in it, as i expected anyway.
By emailing our displeasure to them we at least made out point for what it is worth (probably nothing).