Na. It cant be.
Racism, yes 8 game ban, but that noway. That kind of ban just dilutes the punishment for real offences
Reminded me of this. Swap ‘Jehovah’ for ‘Man’
Indeed that was Mark Cooper’s offence - MC then said to her “you need to realise it’s a man’s game” - as per the written reasons from the FA disciplinary commission.
https://www.thefa.com/news/2022/feb/17/mark-cooper-suspended-170222
What a load of old shit. When did this phrase suddenly become off limits? You are likely to hear it at any football game where men are playing.
If the linesman had been a man, would any of this have happened?
Well no … because then it wouldn’t have been sexist.
It didn’t. If you read the full judgement the commission say the words in themselves aren’t necessarily discriminatory or abusive, and it’s possible that if they believed he’d made the comment towards a player on the pitch and it was just overheard by the lino they wouldn’t have made the same decision.
I know it’s been commented on here elsewhere that Cooper maintains she overheard him making a comment to a player on the pitch, but the commission concluded that on the balance of probabilities the words were directed specifically at the lino and for her being female (conceding that his remarks were made in ignorance not with intent).
So he didn’t know it was a female running the line 
So in essence, when men play football, it can’t be said that it is a man’s game if women are present?
No it can’t be said directly to a woman. Pretty simple and easy to understand really.
They tie themselves up in knots with these judgements and this “balance of probabilities” idea. People’s livelihoods are at stake and they are sitting in ivory towers considering “balance of probabilities”, in situations where one person says they said one thing, the other person says differently.
No they don’t. “Don’t discriminate”. Pretty easy really 
It’s exactly the same criteria that all of UK civil law is based on. It’s only criminal law that specifies “beyond a reasonable doubt”.
Yes, fair point. And we all know of a footballer recently who is in the headlines because of “balance of probabilities”, so perhaps it is a fair and just way. It just (pun intended) doesn’t feel quite right to me. As we know, we have a player at our club who vehemently denies having said what he was accused of, but still got banned for a number of games.
Even with “he said, she said” cases they do look for corroboration of each side of the story or else they have to dismiss. No idea what the evidence presented was for those other cases, but while Cooper also vehemently denies that he made the comment directly at the female lino the video evidence at least backed her version of events not his, and her and the ref’s credibility as witnesses was seen as being higher than his because his account wasn’t consistent - it wasn’t just her word against his.
Here is an example of that. As I was on the FA site looking at the Cooper case that @stig231 linked to, I had a look to see if Manny Monthe’s case had been published yet (it’s not) and then for any further Walsall related cases since I last looked. Nothing for us but there is a new one involving a player from Walsall Arms FC Reds in a Sunday league game. Accusations made but not enough corroborative evidence so the charge was dismissed. https://www.thefa.com/-/media/files/thefaportal/governance-docs/discipline-cases/2022/the-fa-v-levi-adams—16-february-2022.ashx
But it’s not just a man’s game now there is a women’s league. If we can have female refs and linos doing the men’s game, why can’t female players be in the men’s teams and visa versa? Speaking as a woman, I think women should ref women and men ref men’s games then none of this will occur.
The campaign is “hergametoo” for a reason. It’s not a “man’s game”. It is everybody’s. It belongs to all of us. So it is right that if someone suggests otherwise that there is some sanction.
But of course it’s also a long held saying as a proxy for “it’s not a non contact sport ref” for when officials get a bit picky with a bit of physical.
We all need a bit of coaching and the odd check - including me - maybe especially me - because you can’t undo decades of hard coding around stuff you used to think was ok to say. We should accept that sometimes we can be clumsy and thank those who point out that to even accidentally imply that an official shouldn’t be doing their job on account of their gender is wrong. We can then try that bit harder to be better knowing we’ll never get it completely right. In this scenario maybe go for “it’s not basketball for fudge sake” as my go to for over fussy officiating.
I think in this case the sanction is harsh and I certainly don’t think any worse of Cooper for saying it. Glass houses and all that. But - it is good that we’ve had another nudge about being just a bit more thoughtful.
Because women footballers cannot compete with men, currently. I’m sure if they could then they would be signing for mens teams.
I’m not saying that football per se is a man’s game, as clearly it is an inclusive sport, but when men are playing exclusively against other men, then that game is a man’s game, irrespective of the fact that a woman is running the line.
I thought I was reading a column in The Guardian for a brief moment, then 
Nah, I’d have pretended to be perfect if I wrote for The Guardian. And I’d have suggested imprisonment for Cooper.
To me if they can ref the men’s game and it is truly inclusive then they should be allowed to play in men’s teams. I don’t agree with this though, like I said earlier about women refs and managers for women’s teams and men to stick to the men’s game especially as the women’s game is gaining more status now.