A footballer who faced a ban for ‘violating’ an opponent’s ‘private parts’ has made a surprising return to the field, as his club seemingly exploited a loophole, causing a dispute with the Football Association (FA).

Ollie Clarke, the captain of Swindon Town, received a seven-game suspension following incidents during a Carabao Cup match against Cardiff City on August 12, which left one Cardiff player ‘very emotional and struggling to speak’ due to the ‘highly invasive’ acts on two opponents.

Having already served four games of his suspension, which began on December 19, Clarke made a 77-minute appearance in Swindon’s unexpected 2-1 win against Luton in the EFL Trophy on Tuesday.

In an unexpected turn, Swindon reportedly believes Clarke was eligible to play because the Luton fixture wasn’t listed on the FA’s disciplinary portal, suggesting his ban did not apply, a claim highlighted by The Sun.

According to competition rules, red card offenses in ‘first team competitive matches’—including league games, the FA Cup, or the Carabao Cup—do not extend to the EFL Trophy, a loophole Swindon seems to have utilized.

Ollie Clarke was given a seven-game ban for the ‘extremely serious and unusual incident’

Clarke (left), pictured in the game against Cardiff in which the incidents took place last August. There is no suggestion Cardiff player Callum Robinson (right) was one of the opponents affected by Clarke’s behaviour

Clarke was not given a red card for his ‘extremely serious’ conduct in the Cardiff match but was retrospectively charged by the FA before being slapped with a seven-game suspension.

‘The matter is in the hands of our legal team, so I cannot comment any further,’ Swindon chief executive Anthony Hall told The Sun.

The tie against Luton, a division higher than Swindon, had already caused controversy after striker Aaron Drinan came on as a second-half substitute, despite his name not being on the team sheet.

Swindon are thought to have admitted a clerical error but blamed Luton’s WiFi for manager Ian Holloway being unable to update his squad list on his iPad. 

The incident caused the match to be stopped in the 67th minute. Holloway, who described the blunder as a ‘major whoopsie’, then offered to immediately take Drinan off but Luton counterpart Jack Wilshere insisted that was not necessary.

Clarke was also fined £2,750 by the FA, which published shocking details of the incidents in its written reasons earlier this week.

One of the victims was described by the referee Elliot Bell of approaching him ‘visibly upset’ to tell him about what had happened.

Bell included the detail in his official match report and an Independent Regulatory Commission heard evidence from the Swindon captain. Clarke admitted the charges in the hearing and gave explanations for them, arguing that both incidents were unintentional – a claim rejected by the panel.

The above was provided as detail for the hearing by referee Elliot Bell from his match report

Ian Holloway has claimed Swindon captain Ollie Clarke would not have been found guilty of foul play if the incident that resulted in his seven-match ban had been handled by police

There was ‘no plausible explanation’ for Clarke’s behaviour, said the panel, insisting that ‘touching an opponent’s private body parts during a game’, especially when the ball was out of play, was a ‘highly invasive, intrusive and violating’ act. 

The FA also described the incidents as ‘extremely serious and unusual’.

Holloway, furious with the decision, has now claimed that Clarke would have been cleared if the case had been dealt with by police as he hit out at the FA over the ‘disgraceful’ process.

The 62-year-old manager said: ‘I vouched for his character, and I know he’s competitive, and he wouldn’t have meant anything that he’s allegedly done.’

‘We tried to fight it. It took so long, it was disgraceful. They drew it out, and now he’s got such a hefty ban. It was an unfair decision, in my opinion. But there you go.

‘For me, it hasn’t affected the way I feel about him, not in any way, shape or form. I saw what he did. I’ve watched it back. And for me, it was nonsense. That’s the way the game is these days, and that’s the way they see it.

‘But I would have rather they reported him to the police, and the police would have let him off, because there’s no evidence, simple as that.’

After the hearing, Holloway also raged that the ban was ‘ridiculous’ and defended Clarke as being a ‘hard-working and aggressive’ player.

South Wales Police confirmed to Daily Mail Sport on Wednesday that they had no involvement in the incident or the FA’s decision, which was issued last month.

The stunned and shaken reaction of one of the victims was factored in when Clarke’s punishment was determined. 

‘In respect of Charge 1, the Commission considered the actions of the Player to be highly violating and intentional foul play,’ the written reasons stated. 

It continued: ‘In respect of Charge 2, the Commission considered the actions of the Player to, again, be highly violating and intentional foul play, with the further aggravated factor of the incident occurring 37 minutes after the first incident within the same match.’

‘The indecency of this action requires an immediate sporting sanction of no less than six matches,’ they surmised.

‘Taking both incidents together, the panel applied a starting point of nine matches before reducing the punishment to seven under the principle of totality.’

In response to the written reasons, Swindon said: ‘Swindon Town Football Club acknowledges the written reasons published by the FA in respect of Ollie Clarke, following the recent Regulatory Commission decision.

‘Throughout the process, Ollie Clarke maintained his innocence and only admitted the charges on the basis that both charges were unintentional.

‘The club continues to support Ollie and will do so moving forward. Swindon Town Football Club will be making no further comment at this time.’

Daily Mail Sport has contacted the FA and Swindon for comment.