No that's not right. If BFC appealed and the FA judged that the appeal was frivolous, that there was no grey area at all and that the appeal had only been lodged as a delaying tactic then the ban would be extended. Simply losing an appeal because the FA disagrees with you doesn't mean that the ban is automatically extended.
I would have rather had him tomorrow, personally. But it seems like kelvin is willing to take an injection. That may have influenced things
Its club policy not to appeal red cards, always as been always will be, the FA can't be trusted to do the right thing so i think they are 100% correct in this policy
I'm not convinced that the only time when bans are extended is when the appeal was solely a delaying tactic. Another thing, if we won the appeal would we get our £750 back like in cricket and tennis? If there was a ridiculous sending off that was rightly overturned, surely that shouldn't still cost the club?