Journey Adán continues to WC: TAD agrees with Sporting and cancels fine from the Disciplinary Board – Sporting

In October, the Lions were fined €3,876 for delaying Guardian in a super flash after the match with Santa Clara.

Santa Clara Sporting, from Matchday 9 of Liga Bwin, played on October 8, 2022, is still moving – and it’s all because of Adán … going to the bathroom. Following the match in the Azores, which the Lions won 2-1, the Disciplinary Board imposed on Sporting, on 11 October, a fine of €3,876 for the guardian’s late arrival at the Superflash, because he had stayed for minutes in the visiting resort; On the 31st of that month, the appeal of the Alphalad Club was rejected. However, after a new appeal, the Court of Arbitration for Sport (TAD) now supports Sporting and, therefore, annulled the penalty imposed by the CD.

In principle, on the one hand, the disciplinary body of the French Football Association stressed that Adan attended the interview “six minutes after the end of the intervention of the player of the opposing team,” which “it was verified that he had committed a disciplinary offence.” ; Sporting did claim, among other things, that “any delay in the player’s appearance would be due to the fact that he had been compelled to have his physiological needs met immediately, a fact which, in turn, excludes the possibility of it being deemed to have existed, on the part of the plaintiff, any submissive active conduct or omission.” for disciplinary control.

With regard to the unproven facts, namely the length of the period during which Adan was absent, the Anti-Terrorism Law states that “it is impossible to form a safe and firm conviction that would allow a more precise determination of the length of that period of time, in addition to considering that the explanations given by the representative of the league are “contradictory”: “On the one hand, they point to a delay of 6 minutes from the end of the interview with the player Picallo.” [Santa Clara] On the other hand, explicitly state that “Superflash and Flash Interview have[ão] lapsed according to the regulations”—both statements are contradictory and end up nullifying their evidentiary effect: if there was any delay, it cannot be said, at the same time, that the interviews took place according to the regulations; and if they occurred according to the regulations, it is because there was no delay.”

TAD also confirms that witnesses Filipe Dinis (Sporting Communications Consultant) and Vasco Fernandes (Sporting Team Manager) testified in a “convincing, safe and coherent manner” and “we were able to question the continuing report of the clarifications given by the representative of the Association”. “The testimony of these witnesses made it possible to establish the degree of confidence required in the judicial proceedings, that instead of only appearing, for the first time, at the place of high-speed interviews 6 minutes after the end of the interview with the player Bicalho (as announced in the clarifications of the representative of the League), in fact the player appeared Adán initially during Bicalho’s interview, then absent for the reasons already mentioned and later returned to the place “, it was reported.

If the regulatory ‘legislator’ wanted to impose strict time limits on ultra-fast interviews, as it did for speed interviews in Article 91 of the Convention on Human Rights, he certainly would not have used the phrase ‘as soon as possible’, similarly to what I did in this regulatory principle the latter, he would have used a clearly defined and measurable standard of time. Now, compelled by the facts presented as established, the plaintiff appears to have fully fulfilled his duty to appear as soon as possible after the end of the match for a super-expedited interview with the selected player,” they add, noting It also indicates that “the meeting of the player of the opposing team (piccolo) has exceeded the legally expected duration (fact J.; cf Art. 90.º, No.º 1, Paragraph c), of the Basel Convention), circumstances which require the player adan to be present at site for a period of time beyond the duration which, under normal circumstances, would be expected in those circumstances the cases would have to endure.”

In conclusion, TAD has decided “to annul the disciplinary sanction of a fine of € 3876.00 applied to the sporting plaintiff Sporting Clube de Portugal – Futebol, SAD (…) and also to annul the decision of the Professional Section of the Disciplinary Board issued to the defendant on October 31, 2022 in the context of the hierarchical appeal process Indecent No. 06-2022 / 2023 which confirmed, in the context of a special administrative appeal, that penalty. Accordingly, the Court ordered the Disciplinary Board to “pay the costs of this arbitration and, taking into account the value of the claim, which was set at €3876.00, to fix the arbitration fee at €750.00 per procedural matter (without prejudice to the reduction provided for in Article 77.º, No. 2, of the LTAD, where applicable), the arbitrators’ fees at €2,500.00 and the administrative fee at €75.00 per procedural matter (on all such values ​​incur VAT at the applicable legal rate).

The award, which has just been signed by the President of the Arbitration College, Gramaxo Rosera, has been approved by arbitrator Dr. Tiago Rodriguez Bastos and the losing vote for the referee d. Sonia Carneiro.

Posted by Ricardo Granada