Tuesday, 1 September 2009

Appeal and UEFA idiocy

So UEFA have banned Eduardo for two matches, the club are set to hear the full details by Thursday and will then have three days in which to appeal:

“We have been informed that we will receive a “reasoned decision” from Uefa by Thursday of this week. Once we receive Uefa’s rationale, we will make a decision on the next steps.

We have been deeply frustrated by the perfunctory and apparently arbitrary process that Uefa has followed in this instance. We believe it is imperative that Uefa’s explanation for its decision provides clear and comprehensive standards that will be consistently enforced. It is also critical that Uefa provides specific details of the processes it plans to adopt in reviewing all games under its jurisdiction."

How on earth UEFA can reason this Kangeroo judgement appears almost beyond comprehension. How can they simply start charging people at random because the media start making a bit of noise? This cannot be consistent, it cannot be fair, it is by nature random and haphazardly unfair. As the Telegraph explains there is a bit of inconsistency here as Article 10(1c) which was introduced over three years ago states that:

“for acting with the obvious intent to cause any match official to make an incorrect decision or supporting his error of judgment”

This is directly contradicted by another of their random rules:

"Decisions made by the referee on the field of play are final and may not be reviewed by Uefa’s disciplinary bodies.”

If UEFA were to enforce Article 10(1c) consistently then it could result in many bans for every game played as every single act of dishonestly appealing for a throw in or corner could be deemed to break this rule. It is a ludicrous idea.

Arsenal also feel that the video evidence shows quite clearly that there was contact to Eduardo's ankle from the Celtic keeper, something I pointed to at the time. It remains clear that if there is any justice in the world then Eduardo will not be punished, however it appears there is very little justice when football's governing bodies come into it.

Who can forget Van Nistelrooy punching Freddy, who can forget numerous leg breaking tackles that have been ignored, who can forget the ridiculously over the top punishment we have received for various hand bagging incidents against both Chelsea and Manu, and who can forget the FA's trial by video of several Arsenal players for the most inocuous of incidents while the GBH of others has been ignored? Justice never came into these decisions, consistency certainly didn't come into it either, it was a question of a corrupt institution reacting to the blood curdling cries from the moronic media.


Rhinogooner said...

This outcome was never in doubt....unfortunately.

None of the injustices done to us over the years has been retrospectively punished. But then again, we've always carried ourselves in a more dignified manner. Had we decided to fuss about these things to draw attention to them, perhaps discipline would have been meted out. But we would have gained a reputation as a pack of big girls blouses then. Oh wait, we already have that rep, no?

Anonymous said...

If the decision is upheld,which i doubt,then UEFA have opened a can of worms and also made a rod for there own back.Firstly it's a political decision not about football or so-called respect campaign.

Platini is on a crusade,with blatters backing,to break the English dominate position on euro football and this is probably the start.Uefa,if there stick to this article must be exercised across the board as if not we have a case for victimisation and if there do there going to be very busy with roknobole at Madrid and the other spanish clubs.

It also showed how petty the SFA are and also shows how baised the media is but expect more and our only reply is keep winning.

Ted said...

I think we are on something of a lost cause here fellas.

I tend to think that Eduardo did exaggerate the penalty, and whether there is contact or not, it was a soft penalty.

UEFA now wants to make an example of Eduardo, which is harsh on him, but may not be a bad thing in principle.

Yes, its unfair, inconsistent and difficult to understand, but when was football any different? A burglar caught red handed cannot escape punishment by saying that everyone else is stealing.

I think we should simply take this ban on the chin and move on.

marcus said...

There's a part of this entire idiotic affair that few people have noticed.

The rule under which Eduardo was punished was adopted by UEFA in 2006. Before Eduardo's ban, there was only one other ban for diving. The first case was in 2007 or 2008, can't remember which.

UEFA banned a Lithuanian player for diving in an int'l match (a qualifier, I forget for which tournament).

Which country did Lithuania play against that day?


Scotland won that game 3-1. Nevertheless, the Scottish FA vigorously campaigned for UEFA to ban the player. UEFA duly obliged. He got a 3-match ban.

No other FA in Europe has chosen to use this new rule so no other player has been banned for diving. So UEFA shows no desire to apply this rule unless an influential FA campaigns for it.

Remember that the Scottish FA are also the ones who spearheaded the ludicrous expansion of the Euro championships to 24 teams, changing what has been a short, well organized tournament to a hugely bloated one that will have a lot of useless games with poor teams. This occurred after Scotland failed to qualify for the Euros.

The Scottish FA were also instrumental last summer in ending all possibility of UEFA adopting goal line technology. The English FA had spearheaded the testing by two companies of two methods of goal line technology for UEFA. The two companies put a lot of time, money and effort into that testing process. In the end, all the work they put in, all the effort the English FA (and their allies) put in went to nought. The companies famously lodged strong public complaints because of all the money and work they'd poured into the testing regime.

Using very poorly reasoned arguments, UEFA refused to adopt the technology and it was widely reported that the Scottish FA was instrumental in that decision (convincing the Welsh FA to go along).

I can assure you that if Arsenal had drawn a team from another country in the CL qualifying tie, and Eduardo had dived, none of this controversy would have happened nor would have there been any punishment.

Anonymous said...

Interesting conspiracy theory Marcus. But what's the connection between UEFA and Scotland.

Is this another French support for the Jacobites in Britain?

marcus said...

Stupid comment, Anonymous, about a "conspiracy theory" and your hilarious question about a secret "connection" between UEFA and the Scottish FA. There's no "secret" connection, you're demontrating your own ignorance about the nature of UEFA or any other organization. UEFA comprises the football associations of all European nations. It is a well documented fact that some FAs wield more influence than others. This isn't something I've invented it's something that anyone who READS and keeps informed about UEFA and its various decisions understands. Just like FIFA and many other organizations in other fields (like the UN), there are more influential parties who wield their power while weaker members don't have as much pull. Basic stuff. Guess it's too difficult for you to understand basic organizational politics. At UEFA the most powerful FAs are the smaller football countries, that's just simple well-known basic fact, hardly a "secret."