The row over the abolition of FA Cup replays intensified on Friday, with the EFL accusing the Football Association and the Premier League of sidelining its clubs from the decision-making process.

Here the PA news agency looks at the situation more closely.

What has happened?

The EFL released an explosive statement on Friday afternoon saying the agreement announced between the FA and the Premier League on the new format and funding for the FA Cup was “a further example of how the EFL and its clubs are being marginalised in favour of others further up the pyramid” which “only serves to threaten the future of the English game”.

A number of EFL clubs and some from lower down the pyramid have also criticised the lack of consultation on the issue. One of them, League Two side Bradford, said that although retrospective consultation was still necessary, it would be “nothing more than an insult”.

What has the FA said?

Football’s national governing body said it “understands the concerns” expressed in the last 24 hours and said it would be “sharing more details with clubs very shortly to explain the additional revenue opportunities in the early rounds”.

It added that the EFL had been involved in discussions about replays for over a year and that “all parties accepted they could not continue”. The FA also pointed out that the calendar changes were approved by its Professional Game Board (PGB) which includes four EFL representatives.

So the EFL backed the changes?

The EFL insists the abolition of replays from the FA Cup was “agreed solely between the FA and the Premier League”. It said its PGB representatives did challenge the position on replays and were told that clubs would be “comfortable” without them. The EFL added: “Any decisions taken on the calendar involving EFL representatives are in no way an endorsement of the joint deal agreed between the FA and Premier League that imposes changes to the FA Cup competition format in isolation.”

The FA, EFL and Premier League were in discussions over the so-called “New Deal For Football” to agree new financial settlements and changes to the domestic calendar in response to fixture pressures caused by UEFA expanding its club competitions from 2024-25. However, the EFL statement says the discussions over the FA Cup were “bilateral” between the FA and the Premier League.

The EFL insists it must be involved in all discussions on changes to the calendar affecting its clubs and crucially, how any such changes are compensated for. But sources close to the EFL feel that now Premier League clubs have opted to halt talks on a new settlement with the 72 clubs, the EFL is being sidelined.

What happens now?

The FA says it will try to convince lower-league clubs they will not “lose out” as a result of the changes. The EFL says the FA and the Premier League must “re-evaluate their approach” to dealing with it and its 72 clubs.

York owner Matt Uggla has said he will contact all those clubs who have spoken out in opposition to the changes to “discuss our options” regarding the FA Cup.

“We might be called small clubs but together we are giants,” he wrote on X.

He described boycotting the FA Cup as “the nuclear option”.

Chelsea spent more than £75million on agents’ and intermediaries’ fees this season, according to figures released by the Football Association.

The data, which covered the 12 months to February 1 and therefore this season’s two transfer windows, showed the total spend by top-flight clubs was £409.59m – an increase from £318.2m for the 2022-23 campaign.

The Blues head the list paying £75,140,524 – having brought in players like Moises Caicedo, Christopher Nkunku, Romeo Lavia, Nicolas Jackson and Cole Palmer over the period covered – which was almost £32m more than previously spent.

Despite the outlay Mauricio Pochettino’s expensively-assembled squad have endured an inconsistent Premier League campaign – and were branded “blue billion-pound bottle jobs” by Sky Sports pundit Gary Neville late on during their 1-0 extra-time defeat against Liverpool in the Carabao Cup final.

Elsewhere Manchester City – the biggest spenders in the previous list – ranked second on £60.63m.

Rivals Manchester United spent £34.05m, while Liverpool paid £31.50m in fees and Arsenal a total of £24.76m.

At the other end of the spending list, Luton – promoted to the Premier League via the play-offs in May last year – paid the least at £2.02m.

Chelsea’s total exceeded the overall spending on agents’ fees in the Sky Bet Championship of £61.34m – with Leeds top of the list at £13.28m as they push for a swift promotion.

Burnley boss Vincent Kompany has been charged with misconduct by the Football Association following his side’s 2-2 draw with Chelsea at Stamford Bridge.

Tempers flared after referee Darren England awarded a penalty to the Blues in the 40th minute for Lorenz Assignon’s foul on Mykhailo Mudryk. The Burnley defender was also shown a second yellow card, forcing the Clarets to play the second half with 10 men.

Kompany was sent off for protesting on the touchline and afterwards expressed his opinion that officials have not been good enough throughout the season.

“I’ll keep saying what I think,” Kompany said.

“I’m not shying away from it and I’ve said it to the referees themselves, the officials, refereeing hasn’t been good enough this season.

“And I have said that in, I think, a constructive way, understanding as well the fact it’s not easy for them. The scrutiny is massive, the pressure is bigger than it’s ever been on the officials.

“I think the addition of VAR and more opinions and more officials doesn’t make it easy for them to do their jobs.

“I haven’t got any issues with being fined. I just want it to be right.”

The FA announced on Wednesday that the Burnley boss has been charged with improper conduct.

A statement read: “It is alleged that the manager’s language and/or behaviour around the 40th minute was improper and/or abusive and/or insulting towards a match official and/or questioned their integrity.”

Kompany has until 6pm on Friday, April 5 to respond to the charge.

The Football Association is standing by the controversial design of the new England shirt despite criticism from Prime Minister Rishi Sunak and Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer.

The shirt’s manufacturer Nike has altered the appearance of the St George’s Cross using purple and blue horizontal stripes in what it called a “playful update” to the shirt ahead of Euro 2024.

Sunak warned Nike “should not mess” with the flag while Starmer urged Nike to “reconsider” the design.

The FA said it was “very proud” of the red and white St George’s Cross but gave its support to the new design.

“The new England 2024 home kit has a number of design elements which were meant as a tribute to the 1966 World Cup-winning team,” a spokesperson said.

“The coloured trim on the cuffs is inspired by the training gear worn by England’s 1966 heroes, and the same colours also feature on the design on the back of the collar. It is not the first time that different coloured St George’s Cross-inspired designs have been used on England shirts.

“We are very proud of the red and white St George’s cross – the England flag. We understand what it means to our fans, and how it unites and inspires, and it will be displayed prominently at Wembley tomorrow – as it always is – when England play Brazil.”

Stevenage boss Steve Evans has been charged by the Football Association for failing to comply with a touchline ban.

Evans has until Thursday to respond to an allegation that he breached the terms of an existing punishment – social media users suggested he was too close to the pitch – during his side’s 3-1 League One defeat at Peterborough on March 13.

An FA spokesperson said on the governing body’s official X – formerly Twitter – account: “Stevenage’s Steve Evans has been charged for allegedly failing to comply with the terms of an automatic touchline suspension.

“The manager allegedly breached the terms of his suspension at their EFL League One game against Peterborough United on Wednesday 13 March. Steve Evans has until Thursday 21 March to provide a response.”

Former Peterborough manager Evans was serving the second game of an automatic suspension at the Weston Homes Stadium after being cautioned during his side’s goalless draw at Lincoln earlier this month.

FA guidance on touchline bans says those affected must not “position themselves in or behind the area of the dugout, or any barrier adjacent to the touchline or goal line” to prevent them communicating directly with players during a game.

Evans, who was appointed in March 2022, last month agreed a new, improved contract to remain with the Hertfordshire club until June 2026.

Stronger enforcement on time-wasting goalkeepers was the major development to emerge from the annual meeting of football’s lawmakers as plans to extend sin bin trials to higher levels of the sport were quietly dropped.

Fans could be encouraged to join in countdowns on goalkeepers holding on to the ball too long in proposals approved by the International Football Association Board (IFAB) in Scotland on Saturday.

In competitions taking part in the trial, goalkeepers would be able to hold onto the ball for eight seconds instead of six and the sanction for holding on too long would be a corner or a throw-in in line with the penalty spot, rather than an indirect free-kick.

The plan was one of three trials approved for use in domestic competitions below the top two tiers, with the other two focusing on helping improve player behaviour towards match officials.

But the use of sin bins for dissent will remain at grassroots level for the time being.

FIFA president Gianni Infantino had already ruled out the use of blue cards for temporary dismissals on the eve of the meeting on the banks of Loch Lomond, and did not attend the media conference afterwards before the board headed off to watch St Mirren take on Aberdeen.

The PA news agency understands blue cards had been set to be part of a trial of sin bins at higher levels which were close to publication last month.

But they will not now be extended to higher levels – or to punish tactical fouls – any time soon despite FIFA referees committee chairman Pierluigi Collina claiming in November that discussions were under way about using them in “professional or even high professional football”.

The only developments were two refinements to the current grassroots trials, which will see sin bin yellow cards count towards a potential red card, and players having to wait for the next stoppage before their 10-minute period in the sin bin ends.

Scottish Football Association chief executive Ian Maxwell said: “The sin bin proposal definitely hasn’t gone further backwards.

“We’ve updated the protocol so we will assess how that works in that environment before we decide on what the next steps of those trials would be and if we start to take that further up the football pyramid.”

Football Association chief executive Mark Bullingham added: “If the trials at the lower levels work, of course the conversation continues throughout the pyramid.”

Bullingham admitted the news emerging in February had created a challenge as Premier League managers such as Tottenham’s Ange Postecoglou criticised the plans.

“I don’t think that was ever the intention for the trial to start in the Premier League,” he said.

Two trials linked to player behaviour which were approved were the ability for referees to create zones around themselves which only captains can enter, and for referees to order cooling-off periods where both teams would be required to retreat to their penalty areas.

Plans to tackle time-wasting will see a trial to increase the limit that a goalkeeper can hold on to the ball from six to eight seconds – but actually enforce it. It was recognised that referees are reluctant to give indirect free-kicks in the box, so the punishment could be a corner or a throw-in to the opposition instead.

Bullingham said: “The idea is, once the goalkeeper has got the ball under control, and the referee puts up his hand so that the (last) five seconds gets counted down, you’ll see the crowd respond to that and the other players will.”

The FA chief executive envisages some of the trials could take place in the lower levels of the English Football League or the National League.

“What level we will look at is an open discussion, I’m sure we’ll get that discussion with the relevant leagues,” he added.

Other law changes include the option for competitions to introduce additional permanent concussion substitutions – something which has been trialled in the Premier League since the 2020-21 season. But calls from leagues and players’ unions for temporary subs to allow for head injury assessments were not taken up.

There were no discussions on extending the scope of VAR checks and the only nod to improving the communication between match officials and clubs and supporters over decisions was the move to extend FIFA’s trial where the referee publicly announces their decision and potentially their reasons.

The scheme was in place during last year’s Women’s World Cup and FIFA secretary general Mattias Grafstrom confirmed it will be further trialled at the Olympics this summer.

The committee did not discuss the prospect of broadcasting conversations between referees and video assistants live, or releasing audio on a regular basis.

Maxwell said: “VAR has not been in too long in Scotland and we are working through that process with the rest of football to try to increase that engagement and understanding.”

Newcastle sporting director Dan Ashworth appears to be a man in demand as new Manchester United co-owner Sir Jim Ratcliffe attempts to establish a new era at Old Trafford.

Reports claim Ratcliffe has identified Ashworth as the man he wants to oversee a reboot after his purchase of a 25 per cent stake in the club was approved by the Football Association.

Here, the PA news agency takes a look at Ashworth’s credentials and career to date.

Who is Dan Ashworth?

Ashworth, 52, is a renowned football administrator who was head-hunted by Newcastle’s new Saudi-backed owners to take up the role of sporting director, which he did in June 2022 after serving a period of notice with former club Brighton. Handed responsibility for the club’s “overarching sporting strategy, football development and recruitment at all ages”, he oversaw the Magpies’ surge to a fourth-place Premier League finish and the return of Champions League football to Tyneside after an absence of two decades in his first season in the role.

What is his background?

Having been released by Norwich’s Academy as a 17-year-old full-back, Ashworth worked as a PE teacher while studying for his coaching badges – including the UEFA Pro Licence – and playing semi-professionally for St Leonards and Wisbech Town before a spell in the United States with West Florida Fury.

Where has he worked?

He was handed his first full-time role by Peterborough, where he began life as the club’s education and welfare officer and worked his way up to Academy director during Barry Fry’s reign as manager. He spent three years as director of Cambridge’s Centre of Excellence before joining forces with Aidy Boothroyd to establish West Brom’s Academy. However, it was in his role with the FA, which he took up in 2012, that his stock rose sharply. He was the man responsible for instilling an “England DNA”, an ethos encompassing the entire international set-up at St George’s Park, which has been cited as a major factor in the senior team’s progression to the latter stages of the last three major tournaments as well as success at age group level. In 2018, he joined Brighton and helped to establish the club as an emerging Premier League force.

What are his strengths?

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Newcastle United FC (@nufc)

Ashworth is far more than a transfer guru. A man credited with an eye for undiscovered talent, his involvement on that front in recent years – and certainly at Newcastle – has been to get the deal done when a target has been identified and agreed upon. However, he sees himself largely as the hub of a wheel, linking the various activities of a club’s football operations strategically and ensuring all are functioning to the benefit of the whole. His breadth of experience in different aspects of the business and his personable manner allow him to interact effectively with staff from top to bottom.

How easy will it be to prise him away from St James’ Park?

Given their determination to get him in the first place – he resigned from his job Brighton in February 2022 and had to wait around four months to get to work at St James’ – Newcastle will be understandably reluctant to allow Ashworth to leave. However, they are equally aware that should United adopt a similar approach to theirs having persuaded their man his future lies elsewhere – after another suitable spell of gardening leave – they may simply be better off biting the bullet and negotiating his departure. Asked about his exit from the AMEX Stadium in October 2022, Ashworth said: “Sometimes in life an opportunity comes along where you just go, ‘Blimey, it’s just too good to turn down’.” That time may have arrived once again.

Sheffield United boss Chris Wilder has been handed a Football Association charge for his bizarre rant about a sandwich-eating linesman.

Wilder was incensed when one of referee Tony Harrington’s assistants was consuming a sandwich when the Blades manager went to see him after the 3-2 defeat at Crystal Palace last month.

Wilder described it as a “complete lack of respect” and also called Harrington’s performance “ridiculous” in an interview with BBC Radio Sheffield after the game.

He said: “It’s yet again another ridiculous performance from the referee.

“Every 50/50 or tight decision goes against us and if that’s what we’re going to have to deal with between now and the end of the season, we’re going to deal with it.

“But I’m not just going to go under the radar and not say anything. I’ve been to see the referee and I’ve told him that.

“One of his assistants was eating a sandwich at the time, which I thought was a complete lack of respect. Hopefully he enjoyed his sandwich while he was talking to a Premier League manager.”

The Football Association has sanctioned the Blades boss with a charge of improper conduct.

It said in a statement: “Chris Wilder has been charged with a breach of FA Rule E3.1 in relation to media comments that followed Sheffield United’s Premier League match against Crystal Palace on Tuesday 30 January.

“It’s alleged that the manager’s comments constitute improper conduct in that they imply bias and or/attack the integrity of the referee, or referees generally, and/or bring the game into disrepute.

“Chris Wilder has until Friday, 16 February, to provide his response.”

The Football Association has approved Sir Jim Ratcliffe’s purchase of a 25 per cent stake in Manchester United.

Confirmation that the Premier League had given its backing to the deal was contained within an update to the Securities and Exchange Commission on Monday evening.

A further SEC update has now revealed that approval from the FA has also been obtained as completion edges closer.

Within an amended tender offer statement published on Wednesday afternoon came confirmation that the national governing body’s approval “has already been obtained”.

The green light from the FA is one of the last remaining steps but the deal cannot be completed until the tender offer for Class A shares is finalised.

The period in which holders of Class A shares can tender them for sale has been extended from February 14 until 23:59 on February 16.

Mikel Arteta has been given until Friday to respond to his Football Association charge for comments he made after Arsenal’s defeat by Newcastle earlier this month.

The Gunners boss branded the VAR decision not to rule out Anthony Gordon’s goal in his side’s 1-0 defeat at St James’ Park “an absolute disgrace”.

Arteta has been charged with a breach of FA rule E3.1 and initially had until Tuesday to offer his response.

However, that deadline has now been extended until Friday at the Gunners’ request, the PA news agency understands.

VAR made a triple check to see whether the ball had gone out of play before Joe Willock’s cross, whether Joelinton had fouled Arsenal defender Gabriel and whether Gordon had been offside.

Arteta could not hide his anger after the match, saying: “You have to talk about how the hell did this goal stand up? Incredible. I feel embarrassed.

“I have to now come in here and try to defend the club and please ask for help because it’s an absolute disgrace that this goal is allowed. An absolute disgrace.”

Arsenal manager Mikel Arteta has stood by both the club’s and his own criticism of Premier League officiating after Arsenal’s loss at Newcastle on Saturday as the Football Association asked for observations following the condemnation of referees.

The Gunners lost 1-0 at St James’ Park – their first Premier League defeat of the campaign – as Anthony Gordon scored a controversial winner for the hosts.

The second-half goal was checked for three separate VAR offences – the ball going out of play, a foul by Joelinton on Arsenal defender Gabriel Magalhaes and a potential offside – but survived them all to ultimately earn Newcastle the three points.

Speaking after the defeat, Arteta said it was “embarrassing” and a “disgrace” that the goal stood, while Arsenal issued a statement on Sunday in support of their manager’s forthright views.

However, the PA news agency understands Arteta and Arsenal could now be charged by the FA after the governing body wrote to both manager and club asking for their observations on the matter.

The club have three business days to respond to the request before the FA makes its decision on whether to take no further action, remind Arsenal of their responsibilities, give out a formal warning or issue a charge.

Arsenal could fall foul of breaching Rule E3.1 of the FA code, relating to media comments, but there is no specific punishment if they are found guilty.

Asked before news of the FA getting in touch if he would have done anything differently, Arteta replied: “It is my duty to stand in front of you, to stand in front of the cameras, and give a very clear and honest assessment of what happened in the game.

“And this is what I did, reflect very openly on how I felt that the team played and how the game was conditioned by this results with the decisions that were made. It is the duty.

“My duty is to be defending my players, supporting my players, supporting my club, defending my people in the best possible way and this is what I am going to do time after time.

“I do it, not the way I feel, (but) with the evidence and being as clear as possible. And I always do it, when we play real I need to say it, when we have lost, to take my responsibility, the first one is me to do it. It is the way that I am and I have to defend my club.”

Arteta suggested it is the duty of managers to discuss VAR and the issues it is currently presenting within the game.

“If you guys and everyone watching football are there, we have to give our opinion in an honest way and clear,” he added.

“Don’t talk about other things. Be very clear and respectful, but clear and honest and value what we have.

“Errors are part of evolution. The trajectory is never going to be like this (gestures straight up), there are always going to be bumps in the road and these things are necessary to improve the game in the right way.

“But we have to talk loudly. If you have a problem and you put it in your drawer, the problem is in the drawer and it’s going to stink at some point. If you have a problem, let’s talk about it, try to improve it. That’s what we are trying to do. Nothing else.”

Arsenal’s statement claimed “yet more unacceptable refereeing and VAR errors” occurred during the loss at Newcastle as the club “wholeheartedly supports” Arteta’s comments, stating players, coaches and supporters “deserve better”.

The statement has been criticised in some quarters with Sky Sports pundit Gary Neville labelling it “dangerous”.

Arteta, though, believes it does not legitimise those who abuse referees for perceived poor decision-making against the club.

“No, the support we have given to everybody is not going to change. I will be in meetings trying to reinforce that,” he said.

“This is not the topic. Everyone wants the same thing, but we have to understand that we (managers) have to be there.

“We have a duty to express how we feel with all the evidence we have and the history of what happened.

“We have to stand for our people, our values and who we are. When the club has done it, it’s been in very specific moments for the right reasons.

“It shows the unity and understanding that is within the club to position ourselves in a really clear and honest way. That’s our duty as a club.”

Arteta was speaking ahead of Arsenal’s Champions League clash against Sevilla, where victory on Wednesday night could see his side qualify for the knockout stages with two Group B games to go.

“The moment you have a chance in football to put it to bed, do it,” he said of wrapping up qualification early.

“We have to do a lot of things right tomorrow to earn the right to win it and against a really good team with enormous experience in this competition.

“We have to prove it tomorrow in front of our people how excited we are to play that game and what it means for us.”

The Football Association will review whether to continue lighting the Wembley arch as an act of tribute following criticism over its response to the Israel-Palestine conflict, its chief executive Mark Bullingham has said.

Bullingham accepted the “hurt” caused to the Jewish community by the FA’s decision not to light the arch in the colours of the Israeli flag for last Friday’s England friendly against Australia, following attacks on Israeli citizens by Hamas militants earlier this month.

But he set out the steps the FA had taken to respond in what it felt was the most appropriate way to “one of the most complex geopolitical conflicts on Earth”.

“This week has made us question whether we should light the arch and when, and we’ll be reviewing that in the coming weeks,” Bullingham said at the Leaders Week conference at Twickenham.

“I recognise that our decision caused hurt to the Jewish community who felt that we should have lit the arch, and that we should have shown stronger support for them.

“This was one of the hardest decisions we’ve had to make, and the last thing we ever wanted to do in this situation was to add to the hurt.

“We aren’t asking for everyone to agree with our decision, but to understand how we reached it.

“It would be easy for football to ask why we’re the only sport being talked about in this way, particularly when rugby and cricket are in the middle of their World Cups.

“However, you have got to understand, and we understand, that the power of football means it will always be in the spotlight. And that’s just something we we have to accept.”

The FA was heavily criticised by a number of Jewish community groups last week, while Rabbi Alex Goldberg resigned from an FA faith in football group over its response. It was also criticised for not lighting the arch by Lucy Frazer, the Cabinet minister responsible for sport.

Bullingham set out the steps the FA had taken to reach the position it did.

“We first saw the acts of terror unfold on Saturday, October 7, along with the rest of the country. We immediately wrote to the Israeli FA to communicate our horror at what was taking place,” he said.

“We knew the situation could move very, very quickly, and was likely to escalate, so we wanted to have expert guidance, and more information available on what we should do because we had a match on Friday against Australia.

“We also spoke with our Australian colleagues and other stakeholders in the game to understand the views of players, clubs, and also of the leagues.

“It’s worth noting that the Australians had upcoming games against both Palestine and Lebanon, so their desire for neutrality was obviously incredibly strong.

“We then had a long board meeting on the Wednesday night and heard from experts on what is one of the most complicated geopolitical conflicts on Earth.

“They then left the room and we had a debate on working out what we should do.

“We all felt then, and we all feel now, that football should stand for peace and humanity and the wish to show compassion for all innocent victims of this terrible conflict.

“Our compassion and sympathy is clearly for families and children in particular.

“We then held a minute’s silence and wore black armbands recognises issuing a statement together with the Australian Federation to explain our actions, which many other sports then followed with identical wording, and our language was also very similar to that used by the United Nations.

“We were the only football body in Europe to have a minute’s silence, which was, as I said, for all innocent victims.”

The Football Association is expected to ask FIFA to extend Ivan Toney’s ban globally unless an appeal leads to the suspension being overturned.

As things stand the 27-year-old will not be able to play again until January 17 next year after he was banned for eight months by an independent regulatory commission for admitting 232 breaches of FA betting rules.

The PA news agency understands the FA could only apply to FIFA for a worldwide extension if a ban is still in place once the appeals process is complete.

Once the written reasons in the case are published, both parties have a window of time to issue an intention to appeal. Only once that window closes without an appeal, or the appeals process concludes with a ban still in place, could the FA apply to extend the ban globally.

The extension of the ban worldwide would rule out the possibility of Toney moving overseas to play on a temporary or permanent basis while any ban imposed in England is still in force.

The granting of an extension would require approval from FIFA’s own disciplinary committee, but would appear to be a formality with no obvious precedent where FIFA has refused a national association’s request to extend a ban globally.

The FA did apply to FIFA for a worldwide extension in the cases of two other English players banned over betting rule breaches – Kieran Trippier and Daniel Sturridge – while more recently FIFA accepted an application to extend a ban imposed by the Italian federation on former Tottenham managing director Fabio Paratici, a decision which prompted his resignation from the north London club.

Paratici’s ban was imposed following an investigation into allegations of financial mismanagement at his former club Juventus.

It is unclear at this stage whether Toney – who won his first England cap in March – will appeal against the ban. He said he was “naturally disappointed” about the sanction in a statement issued on Wednesday, but said he would await the publication of the commission’s written reasons concerning the case before commenting further.

The FA is also awaiting the written reasons.

Toney will be allowed to return to training on September 17, four months before the playing ban expires.

The ban takes effect immediately, meaning Toney is out of Brentford’s final two Premier League matches this season starting with the game against Tottenham on Saturday.

Arsenal must pay a £40,000 fine after an independent commission refuted their appeal over an incident in their FA Cup win over Oxford United.

A double for Eddie Nketiah helped fire Mikel Arteta's men into the fourth round with a 3-0 victory earlier this month.

But Arsenal were subsequently charged by the Football Association (FA) for failing to control their players after they surrounded referee David Coote protesting for a penalty in the first half.

Arsenal appealed the charge but have now seen their appeal turned down, and will have to pay out the financial sanction.

"Arsenal FC has been fined £40,000 after its players surrounded a match official during the FA Cup tie against Oxford United FC on Monday 9 January 2023," read a statement from the FA.

"Arsenal FC denied an allegation from the FA that the club had failed to ensure its players conducted themselves in an orderly fashion during the 34th minute, and the club also requested a hearing.

"An Independent Regulatory Commission subsequently upheld the allegation and imposed the club's fine.

"Its written reasons for these decisions will be published in due course."

This is the second financial penalty Arsenal have been hit with in January, having also been fined for their conduct against Newcastle United in a Premier League encounter.

On that occasion, the Gunners were also cited for failing to control their players in response to a no-penalty call from the officials in the closing stages of a 0-0 draw.