David Coote suspended eight weeks for FA Rule E3 aggravated breach over Klopp video

FA suspends referee after video resurfaces

A video recorded in mid-2020 has now led to immediate consequences for Premier League match official David Coote. An independent FA Regulatory Commission has suspended him for eight weeks and ordered him to complete a mandatory face-to-face education programme after he admitted breaching FA Rule E3. The case centers on a clip that surfaced on social media in November 2024, in which Coote used improper and insulting language about then-Liverpool manager Jurgen Klopp, including a reference to nationality.

The Commission found the incident to be an “Aggravated Breach” under FA Rule E3.2, which covers misconduct that includes references—explicit or implied—to protected characteristics. Nationality is one of those characteristics under FA rules. Coote admitted the charge ahead of the hearing, and the panel handed down sanctions that combine a competitive suspension with education, a mix the FA has used in similar discrimination-related cases across the game.

While the FA’s announcement outlines the penalties, it does not spell out when the suspension starts or whether it covers all roles Coote performs, such as fourth official or VAR. In most disciplinary cases of this type, bans apply to all football activities under FA jurisdiction and begin upon notification unless otherwise stated. The written reasons from the Commission—issued alongside the outcome—set out how the panel weighed the evidence, Coote’s admission, and any mitigation before reaching its decision.

The timeline matters here. The FA said the video was believed to have been recorded around July 2020, months after English football returned from the first COVID-19 shutdown. It did not enter the public domain until November 2024, showing how historic content can carry real consequences when it emerges years later. Klopp, who left Liverpool at the end of the 2023–24 season, is not a party to the case, which focuses on the conduct of a match official rather than any on-field incident.

What the FA found—and why it matters

FA Rule E3.1 is the game’s catch-all for improper conduct, including abusive or insulting language. When the conduct includes a reference to a protected characteristic—race, color, ethnic origin, religion or belief, gender, sexual orientation, disability, or nationality—it becomes an “Aggravated Breach” under Rule E3.2, which usually triggers stronger sanctions and targeted education. The face-to-face element is designed to go beyond generic online modules, forcing direct engagement with how language and bias affect participants across football.

For referees, the standard is unforgiving by design. Officials are expected to show neutrality in public and private, on and off the pitch. The professional referees’ body (PGMOL) requires staff to follow strict codes on conduct and social media. Even when a video is older, the FA can still act if the content undermines confidence in the game’s integrity or breaches anti-discrimination rules. In Coote’s case, the nationality reference turned the charge into an aggravated category, and his admission helped streamline the process.

Disciplinary panels look at several factors: how serious the words were, whether there was a discriminatory element, the context, whether the person accepted responsibility, and their record. Education programmes are now common in cases where the FA believes learning and behavior change can reduce harm. These sessions typically involve expert-led workshops, direct discussion about the impact of language on targeted groups, and practical steps for preventing repeat behaviors. Completion is often a condition for full return to duty.

What does an eight-week suspension mean in practice for a top-flight official? It usually removes the referee from all match appointments across the period—Premier League, EFL, FA Cup, and youth or women’s fixtures under FA control. It can also sideline them from VAR operations, assessments, and mentoring, though the FA did not detail the scope in this case. For a referee active across multiple competitions, eight weeks can mean a significant portion of the season’s workload is lost.

The wider message is straightforward: the badge carries responsibilities that do not end when the whistle does. Referees shape the tone of the game just as players and managers do. When an official uses insulting language that references nationality—even in a context not tied to an active match—the FA views it as undermining inclusivity and the trust that clubs, players, and fans place in the officiating group.

There’s also a practical lesson that keeps repeating across football: old recordings come back. Whether it’s a podcast clip, a private video, or a message shared in a small circle, content that surfaces later can still prompt charges. Governing bodies have become more consistent about applying current standards to historic material, especially when it touches on discrimination.

Procedurally, cases like this follow a familiar path. The FA investigates after receiving a complaint or seeing public material, decides whether to charge under the rules, and then sends the case to an independent Commission. If the person charged admits the breach, the panel can move directly to sanctions after considering mitigation. If they contest it, a full hearing reviews evidence from both sides. After the written reasons are published, the parties normally have a short window to appeal—though no appeal had been announced at the time of the FA’s notice.

Coote’s name is well known to Premier League viewers. He has taken charge of top-flight matches and worked as a VAR. That profile is why these cases resonate. Fans scrutinize every decision, and any hint of bias—real or perceived—erodes confidence. By combining a time-bound suspension with education, the FA is signaling that discipline and rehabilitation can go hand in hand.

For clubs and players, the practical impact is minimal beyond the weekly appointment list. PGMOL can reshuffle assignments, promote a fourth official to the middle, or call on Select Group 2 referees when needed. The system is built to absorb short-term absences. The bigger issue is reputational: ensuring the refereeing pool projects impartiality and a shared understanding that discriminatory language, including references to nationality, is off-limits.

If past Commission reports are a guide, the written reasons in cases like this lay out not just the punishment but the logic. Panels often explain why they chose a specific length of suspension, how a guilty plea affected the outcome, and what the education requirement is meant to achieve. Those documents have become a key part of transparency in English football discipline, offering a window into how rules are applied across different roles—from players to coaches to officials.

Key points from the ruling as communicated by the FA:

• Charge: Breach of FA Rule E3.1, with an “Aggravated Breach” under Rule E3.2 due to a reference to nationality.
• Context: A video recorded around July 2020, posted on social media in November 2024.
• Admission: Coote admitted the charge ahead of the hearing.
• Sanction: Eight-week suspension and a mandatory face-to-face education programme imposed by an independent Regulatory Commission.

The FA’s push over the past few seasons has been consistent—set clear lines on discriminatory language, act when those lines are crossed, and attach education to suspensions to change behavior. This case extends that stance to the most scrutinized officials in the English game, underlining that the standard is the same whether you wear a club crest or carry a whistle.