MAX Dowman’s red card appeal failed despite the three member commission being SPLIT on whether he should have been sent off in the Carabao Cup defeat at Fleetwood.

Dowman was dismissed for his retaliation after being sent flying by a tackle from Fleetwood’s Harrison Neal in the latter stage of the game.

The winger kicked out and was red carded by Michael Salisbury.

Teenage ace Dowman is now serving a three-match domestic ban, although he was a late substitute in Arsenal’s Champions League win at Slavia Prague on Wednesday.

Arsenal appealed, claiming both wrongful dismissal and a “clearly excessive” punishment, with both arguments being rejected.

But in the FA’s written reasons for the judgement, it emerged that one member of the panel – comprised of head and former Fulham midfielder Udo Onwere, ex-Blackburn and England winger Stuart Ripley and one-time ref Ray Olivier, backed Dowman’s case.

In what was confirmed as the “minority” view, the report said: “The referee had made an obvious error in sending off Max Dowman for interpreting a challenge that, whilst still unacceptable, was better characterised as adopting an aggressive attitude.

“To the mind of the minority there was no clear action that could be said to be one of excessive force or brutality and therefore no violent conduct.”

However, the two other commission members felt otherwise.

The “majority view” was: “The referee could not be said to have made an ‘obvious error’.

“Max Dowman had received a forceful challenge which he did not see coming and was trapped following this challenge.

“Dowman reacts by attempting to kick out from this trapped position in a forceful way. He clearly attempts to forcefully kick out.

“Max Dowman had the option to step out of this challenge without any reaction but he turned back towards Neal and his forceful attempt at a retaliatory kick gave the referee a decision to make.

“The majority view was that the attempted retaliation fell into the category of Violent Conduct and the decision was not obviously wrong.”

Despite that disagreement on the facts, the commission members agreed that the standard three-game ban was justifiable.

The reasons added: “The Commission members were unanimous as to whether the claim for clearly excessive ought to succeed.

“The Commission did not consider Dowman’s age being a relevant factor in their deliberations.

“Taking everything into consideration did not see any factors that would make this incident ‘truly exceptional’ to the extent that the standard punishment ought to be disapplied.”