Everton have voiced their frustration after the Football Association rejected their appeal against Michael Keane’s red card, insisting the punishment handed to the defender is excessive.
Keane was sent off during Wednesday’s 1-1 Premier League draw with Wolves after a VAR review judged him to have pulled the hair of Tolu Arokodare.
The decision triggered an automatic three-match ban, ruling the 32-year-old out of Everton’s FA Cup clash with Sunderland and league fixtures against Aston Villa and Leeds.
In a strongly worded statement released on Friday, Everton said they were “surprised and disappointed” by the outcome of the appeal, arguing that the incident did not warrant a suspension of that length.
Manager David Moyes echoed the club’s anger when speaking to the media, criticising both the FA panel and the use of VAR.
Moyes said he was “angry” that the three-person panel upheld the decision and admitted he felt “embarrassed” for the video officials who advised referee Tom Kirk to review the incident.
“I’m amazed they didn’t overturn it,” Moyes said.
“A three-game ban for something that shouldn’t have been punished at all is extraordinary."
"I’m more embarrassed for VAR. This was a young referee, and VAR put him in a terrible position by getting involved.”
Moyes also pointed to a separate incident in a recent Arsenal v Liverpool match, questioning the consistency of disciplinary decisions across the league.
Under the laws of the game, hair-pulling is classed as violent conduct, even though it is not explicitly mentioned in the rules, as it is deemed an unnatural action when contesting the ball.
Everton maintain Keane’s actions fell well below that threshold.
In their statement, the club said the appeal was made on the basis that the incident was neither intentional nor forceful, and highlighted Keane’s disciplinary record, noting he had never previously been sent off for violent conduct.
“We firmly believe the severity of the three-game suspension is clearly excessive,” Everton added.
“We are surprised and disappointed that this point of appeal has been rejected.”
