And he was eventually booked for a very late challenge towards the end of the match.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nesta99
Printable View
And he was eventually booked for a very late challenge towards the end of the match.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nesta99
Let's hope the footage doesn't get doctored :pQuote:
Originally Posted by Kiki Balboa
I think the rule around political messages is a progressive one.Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie Darwin
Article 16 - Order and security at UEFA competition matches
(e) 'the use of gestures, words, objects or any other means to transmit any message that is not fit for a sports event, particularly messages that are of apolitical, ideological, religious, offensive or provocative nature;'
If you want all right wing, racist, fascist symbols/flags be banned from football grounds then Uefa rightfully has to ban all expressions that do not fit at a sporting event.
Uefa can't have a bias. Also the fine can't be just porportional depending on sympathies with one wing or another.
Robbie Fowler got fined for his show of support at one game for the Liverpool dockers.
That list of incidents reported to Fare during July 2014. does not carry any weight of veracity or proof. Just because something is on that list does not mean it happened, nor does it mean there is proof that it happened, eg the Dundalk incident mentioned
Overall, it's a rational price to pay in order to rid football grounds of expressions of hate and racism.
In Dundalk's case, it's somewhat farcical that they pay the same fine as Real Madrid would for the same infringement. Isn't there some country that inflicts motoring offence fines in proportion to earnings?
Germany, I think, Geysir.
Surely it's legally possible to make it a condition of entry that fans indemnify their club for any of their actions that cause the club to be fined? Maybe it's something that needs to be done on a league basis.
I guess that's the away end upgrade shelved for another few years?
Article 16 - Order and security at UEFA competition matches
(e) 'the use of gestures, words, objects or any other means to transmit any message that is not fit for a sports event, particularly messages that are of apolitical, ideological, religious, offensive or provocative nature;
This is so broad it could really include anything. Celtic jerseys at a Republic of Ireland v say England or Scotland could be deemed offensive by some under political, religious, or provocative terms. Celtic fans using the tricolour (im not picking on celtic) at european games. I understand the principle and necessity of such rules but a mockery of the rules happens with obvious inconsistency eg when overt racism recieves token attention.
And this includes national flags?Quote:
Originally Posted by geysir
The flag waving of Palestinian flags was interpreted as a political message and inappropriate to the game.Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie Darwin
There is no hard and fast, rigid interpretation of the statute and Uefa have their own standards of reasonable proof.
If this was a regular enough event at a Dundalk game, Dundalk fans with Palestine ethnicity who are also promoting their ethnicity, then that would be grounds for an explanation to the Uefa observer or if it went further - solid grounds for an appeal.
Offhand I can think of old Rangers fc who successfully appealed a Uefa fine, their fans getting with giving fascist salutes to Israeli fans, something to do with the old tradition of the red hand of ulster defence, pulled out of nowhere.
And what about the poppy on the jersey thing with England.
Would I be stopped from entering the ground if I had a Palestinian badge on?
That was just cheeky!!Quote:
Originally Posted by geysir
So on the basis of ethnicity the tricolour at Celtic games could be overlooked even if it is provocative. Should have told the delegate that we have a couple of palestinian fans - i doubt he would have asked to meet them and is about as legit as the rangers bluff
Well that's what I think is the problem, UEFA giving themselves the power to interpret the intent behind the display of a national flag. It's not like a swastika or a celtic cross where it's inadmissible in any instance, this is the flag of a country, and a FIFA member at that.Quote:
Originally Posted by geysir
I was thinking that's what the SSA should do. Just track down a couple of Palestinians, convert them to the Dundalk cause, and then whether they show up at the match or not, you can say you're paying tribute to a section of the club's support.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nesta99
I can't see how that would make a difference. The display of the flags, or the transmission of the message deemed unfit, in other words, was not prevented by the club.Quote:
Originally Posted by outspoken
That's a comically stupid "official" statement reeking of buffoonish posturing, mock outrage and plenty of ego. The SSA clearly have little grasp or appreciation of the regulations concerned or of how said regulations might apply to the club they purport to support. Demanding an immediate statement and apology from their hosts - the club - and then, even more embarrassingly, from UEFA?! That actually made me laugh out loud. What planet are they on? Nobody was silencing their right to free speech per se; if they wanted to protest against the bombardment and occupation of Gaza or demonstrate solidarity with the Palestinian people, there was plenty of public space upon which they could have done that outside of Oriel Park and off the property of the football club.Quote:
Originally Posted by White Horse
They could even have taken selfies and videos of their flag-waving exploits and posted them off to Gaza first-class just so those many long-suffering Gazans who had been watching the match live and who had, in vain, been looking out for absent Palestine flags would definitely still have known they were in the hearts, thoughts and prayers of those renowned humanitarian heroes, the SSA... The SSA were paying guests of Dundalk FC; if you're a visitor on someone's property, you adhere to the rules and expectations of the house.
And, sweet Jesus, if you're going to make a pretty stupid public statement, at least don't be completely stupid about it; it's "there were four" and not "there was four", "are being coldly murdered" and not "are been coldly murdered", and there should never be an apostrophe in "ours" or a 'h' in "were"! Sorry, but that sort of careless disregard just grates with me in a supposedly-serious public statement. :o
How so? Dundalk tried to prevent the display of the flags as instructed by the UEFA delegate and in accordance with the governing regulations.Quote:
Originally Posted by outspoken
I think it would literally fall foul of the rule. I imagine you'd only be stopped, however, if a Dundalk steward, having spotted it, thought it was overt enough to be perceived as transmitting an inappropriate message or if the UEFA delegate noticed it and recommended its removal to the club.Quote:
Originally Posted by bennocelt
Interestingly, Aberystwyth had poppies on their jerseys when the played Derry. Will I report them or will you? :p
But this was anything but apolitical! :pQuote:
Originally Posted by geysir
I'd say the rule is more self-interested than progressive; UEFA seek to promote as neutral and apolitical an image and governing arena as possible, lest potentially-provocative imagery were to deter sponsors and investment. Offend nobody; be everyone's friend; that's the mantra. As for my own opinion of the rule, it's a terribly numbing and sanitising one that neuters football crowds and disarms them of their human sentiments, character, qualities and emotions. What are football teams really if not channels through which the human identities of their fans can be expressed? Since when did a football match have to be such a blandly cordial affair? What is and isn't objectively fit for a sporting event anyway? In an ideal world, waving Palestine flags at a Europa League qualifier would be no problem, even if orchestrated by clueless, ignorant idiots with little knowledge of the Middle Eastern conflict. I say, let fans display what they want and if something falls foul of the law of the land, then the law of the land can deal with it. It's a regressive UEFA law, that is; it stunts and chokes expression within stadia to a degree that not even the law of the land does. Need UEFA really make it their business? Is that practical?Quote:
If you want all right wing, racist, fascist symbols/flags be banned from football grounds then Uefa rightfully has to ban all expressions that do not fit at a sporting event.
Uefa can't have a bias. Also the fine can't be just porportional depending on sympathies with one wing or another.
Robbie Fowler got fined for his show of support at one game for the Liverpool dockers.
...
Overall, it's a rational price to pay in order to rid football grounds of expressions of hate and racism.
Danny - I think the fact the club tried to remove the flags will go in their favour for a smaller fine but as you said they failed to remove them and the club will face sanctions over that as for the media comment with the Palestine case being such a strongly supported one here you'd imagine a small Irish club showing their support for Gaza only to be punished would grab quite a lot of Media attention which in turn may put UEFA under pressure as unlikely as it is.
It is, Their is a flag that has been at games in Oriel and away games for years that has a Palestine flag on itQuote:
Originally Posted by geysir
https://www.google.ie/search?q=dunda...15%3B309%3B154
Was there a controversy over this flag a few years ago?Quote:
Originally Posted by dundalkfc10
Not too my knowledge mate. Il ask around in the pub later but Cant think of anythingQuote:
Originally Posted by White Horse
I found the story. It was from a few years ago:Quote:
Originally Posted by dundalkfc10
FAI brand Palestinian flag as "racist"
by Keith Wallace
Wed, Apr 08 2009
Dundalk FC have been reported and will face a fine over the display of a Palestinian flag by their supporters during last weekend's 3-1 win at Sligo Rovers, after the FAI branded the flag as "racist". However, last night, the Louth club challenged the FAI, stating they are treating the matter "very seriously" and "considering making an official complaint".
Offending banner
"Our fans were very well behaved and did themselves proud [in Sligo]," club secretary Kevin Holland wrote in the Dundalk FC Magazine for the visit of Shamrock Rovers to Oriel Park on Tuesday night. "But during the game the FAI match delegate summoned our Chairman and informed him that he would be reporting Dundalk FC for the display of a racist banner. What was the offending banner? The Dundalk flag that we have seen in Oriel Park for many, many years that features a Palestinian flag. Now, I do not profess to be an expert in these matters - but how can a flag that features an internationally recognised flag be deemed as racist?
Official complaint
"The Palestinian flag is flying outside the United Nations building in New York," he added. "Also, members of the Gardai were standing in front of the flag during the game and didn't have any problem with it. This accusation may be ridiculous but I am treating it very seriously. The Board of Dundalk will be considering making an official complaint against the FAI over this incident. Darren Mansaram was the victim of racist abuse against Drogheda and there was also some racist abuse chanted his way by Sligo fans near where I was sitting in Sligo. To equate a flag to these incidents is disgusting and downright offensive."
One of the concerns I have is the inconsistency of these fines.
Dundalk being fined €20000 for displaying the flag of a FIFA member state Palestine while Bayern Munich were fined only €10000 for their fans displaying the flag of Kosovo who are not FIFA members.
There's a bit of a appeals case here already - precedence of palestinian flag in Oriel many years before the Split match. The size of the fine given to Bayern Munich considereing the difference in the exposure that a political statement would get compared to Dundalk. Now all we need to do is get that Palestinian Dundalk FC Supporters club going ...... what fine! It will be interesting to see what proportion the flag incident makes up of the total fine.
Still nothing official on their site
http://www.uefa.org/disciplinary/index.html
Is that how the appeals process actually works though or are you just speculating? I'm not sure how it works myself, so I can't say with certainty that UEFA will look upon the stewards' fruitless attempt to remove the flags with favour or as a mitigating circumstance, if you will. Will they definitely consider it? All I know is that as far as the relevant regulation is concerned, Dundalk still failed in their ultimate responsibility of preventing the display of the flags inside Oriel Park, whether they made efforts to remove them or not. If the club can somehow prove the flags' display was appropriate to the match, they'll have a case, but that's a different matter.Quote:
Originally Posted by outspoken
The club didn't show their support for Gaza though (not that I'm assuming it's indicative of any personal positions held with regard to the conflict by those who run the club); they tried to prevent the display of the flags of a group of supporters upon the recommendation of the UEFA delegate and in accordance with the regulations. I don't see how UEFA will feel pressured by it; they've been more than happy to fine clubs/players for displays or gestures that would be widely construed as being in support of good causes before, even when happy to admit the punishments might "seem strange and even unfair": http://libcom.org/library/robbie-fow...erpool-dockers
Aye, but weren't the Bayern fans sitting down that time? :pQuote:
Originally Posted by disgruntled
Yeah, I imagined that the individuals in question would only be liable if there was a criminal act of some kind. Still, it would be nice to think that there is some fine print regarding ticket purchase or steward warning that gives Dundalk the right to chase them for the money.Quote:
Originally Posted by DannyInvincible
Also, do Dundalk fans (or anybody else) know what, if anything, will happen to the members of this group? Are they going to be banned?
There are numerous disciplinary cases & fines that never appear on their website.Quote:
Originally Posted by bennocelt
It's an interesting one and I know EG mentioned it too. Are there any precedents or examples in other fields where attendees also have obligations or duties of care by virtue of their attendance at a paid ticket event?Quote:
Originally Posted by osarusan
It's not directly relevant, but I did find it interesting; a few days ago, I was seeking clarification on the jurisdiction or competence of the Court of Arbitration for Sport and was reading a case involving UEFA and Fenerbahçe where UEFA had punished the appellant with a fine and competition ban on the basis of their alleged supporters having disrupted a game with parachute fireworks: http://www.tas-cas.org/d2wfiles/docu...13920FINAL.pdf
I skimmed through it fairly quickly, but what I thought was unusual was that the fireworks had actually come from outside the stadium and had been fired in over the stands, yet UEFA insisted that those who fired the fireworks were to be deemed supporters for whose actions the club were to be held responsible. This was argued because, despite said individuals being opposed to the club's current president, the club had previously admitted that the individuals concerned were known regular attendees of Fenerbahçe matches. It was also alleged that they had been "near the stadium" during the match being played behind closed doors, which implied a direct connection. Fenerbahçe argued that UEFA could not prove the individuals concerned were supporters and further insisted that they could not be held responsible for the "perpetrators [who] did not conduct their actions in the match venue or around the stadium or in its vicinity". UEFA deemed it necessary to point out that "the term 'at a match' used in the UEFA Disciplinary Regulations implies any incident that takes place during a match, irrespective of where the misconduct originated, provided that the incident occurs in the course of the match or is linked to the match in question, the criteria in this respect applying to before, during and after the match".Quote:
Originally Posted by CAS
The club's argument on this matter was further summarised as follows:
"More specifically, the Club finds that the violations did not took place 'at the match' as provided for in Article 6(1) UEFA DR or 'around the stadium' as provided for in Article 6(2) UEFA DR. Pursuant to the general legal principle of nulla poena sine lege no disciplinary measures may be imposed on the Club for the unforeseeable actions of the perpetrators as the Club bears no default, also because the dense settlement structure around the match venue takes it impossible to control the area and to prevent actions of this kind."
Regardless, CAS rejected their appeal and, in deeming UEFA's punishment proportionate, let the competition ban and fine stand.
The following paragraphs (indeed, containing some elements possibly relevant to the thread at hand) explain the conclusion of CAS:
"81. For the avoidance of doubt, the Panel reiterates that it is of no avail to the Club that the actions of the perpetrators might have been unforeseeable, that the area around the stadium might have been hard to control due to its location and that the parachute flares were allegedly launched from a distance of 800m from the stadium. As set out supra, the fact that the Club made efforts to prevent any disturbances, such as providing for the presence of 796 security personnel (600 mobile striking force personnel and 196 permanent staff) inside and around the stadium and the security measures taken at the entrance doors of the stadium and its surroundings, are of no avail to the Club as these are only circumstances that can possibly be taken into account in respect of the proportionality of the sanction, but are not circumstances that can serve as a ground for excuse or exculpation of the Club, as the strict liability rule
as provided for by Article 6(1) of the UEFA DR applies.
82. Consequently, the Panel finds that the perpetrators are supporters of the Club and that the Club is directly responsible for the misbehaviour of its supporters based on Article 6(1) of the UEFA DR. The Club however challenges the application of the strict liability principle enshrined in Article 6 of the UEFA DR. Therefore, the Panel will subsequently assess the validity of this principle before determining whether the Club is liable for the behaviour of its supporters and should be sanctioned accordingly."
This also might be illuminating with regard to a club's responsibility:
"UEFA member associations and football clubs are responsible, even if they are not at fault, for the improper conduct of their supporters, including racist acts, which expressly breach the Disciplinary Regulations. Clubs are automatically held responsible once such an act has been established. The object of this rule is very clearly to ensure that clubs that host football matches shoulder the responsibility for their supporters’ conduct, which must comply with UEFA’s objectives. It should be noted that UEFA has no direct disciplinary authority over a club’s supporters, but only over European football associations and clubs. The latter are responsible for conforming to the standards and spirit of the UEFA regulations. If clubs were able to extricate themselves from any responsibility by claiming that they had taken all measures they could reasonably be expected to take to prevent any breach of the UEFA rules, and if supporters still manage to commit such an act, there would be no way of penalising that behaviour, even though it constituted a fault in itself. UEFA’s rules of conduct would therefore be nothing more than vague obligations, since they would be devoid of any sanctions. By penalising a club for the behaviour of its supporters, it is in fact the latter who are targeted and who, as supporters, will be liable to pay the penalty imposed on their club. This is the only way in which UEFA has any chance of achieving its objectives. Without such an indirect sanction, UEFA would be literally powerless to deal with supporters’ misconduct if a club refused to take responsibility for such behaviour."
It appears CAS would be prepared to acknowledge a club having taken measures to prevent the occurrence of a detrimental incident as a mitigating circumstance, so perhaps UEFA's disciplinary body would too upon an appeal to them:
"126. The Panel finds that the only mitigating circumstances that can be taken into account are that the Club took certain security measures and arranged the presence of approximately 800 security staff inside and outside the stadium and that the Club immediately took action against the perpetrators in co-operation with the relevant authorities and penalized them with a stadium ban. The other alleged mitigating circumstances are in fact aggravating, not relevant or contrary to the facts as established by the Panel."
In this case though, CAS found that the other aggravating circumstances had the broad effect of negating the aforementioned extenuating ones.
You are a nerd Danny:p
Do club colours constitute as a valid reason to fly a particular flag?
Ha, they might do, but you'd need to make sure UEFA's Disciplinary Committee don't hear wind of the SSA's public statement.
Have yous ever had a bit of green on your jerseys, by the way?
Green 3rd kit few years back but no. Then neither was yellow and blue...
Was the yellow away strip brought in because of bananas?Quote:
Originally Posted by Nesta99
Dundalk should refuse to pay, end of.
Complete coincidence.Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie Darwin
I think the fine gets deducted from the total prize money received so we don't have a choice in the matter.
The club should appeal this to UEFA and then to the CAS. In the interim they should ban the flag bearers for life and the ringleaders.
This season alone fines of around 22k incl this one and last season also your probably talking about close to 30k worth of fines that can be attributed to the SSA.
How much would an appeal to UEFA and the CAS cost?
Have read that the appeals are not very costly at all so all clubs will have a chance to appeal if they want.Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie Darwin
Be intresting too see when the break down of the €18000 comes from
Think we have seen the end of the Petrol FAI man in Oriel finally Thank God, so some good has come out of it
The early season boycott, the stupidity of defying UEFA's Palestinaian flag ban, and the silent protest at the Galway match. Constant disruption to a club and a team that is going places.Quote:
Originally Posted by dundalkfc10
Some individuals don't know the meaning of the word "supporter".
How badly are all these fines going to affect Dundalk going into next season?
Some people just can't seem to grasp the problem.
UEFA are very strict on political, religious and race issues at their games. The SSA were clearly making a political statement. They were asked to remove the flags and refused and costing their club big time. Dundalk FC have no links with Palestine. That's the difference with Ajax and Spurs. They both have links with Judism (not a religious link). Celtic have links with Ireland. Celtic have been fined by UEFA over political statements several times. UEFA even tried to block England from wearing the Poppy during international matches. IIRC UEFA asked Glentoran to remove the Jesus advestising board from the Oval. You can't even bring a John 3:16 sign into a stadium anymore. Crazy as it is but them the rules!
Anyway, politics and sport should never mix. Would you bring a Dundalk flag to a Free Gaza rally? No, because it has no place there. Then why bring a Palestinian flag to a Dundalk match in protest to something that has nothing to do with the club or football? What about all the other conflicts around the world?
My understanding is that planning the budget for next season is at an advanced stage. It is anticipated that any revenue from prize money and surplus revenue from the Europa League games would be invested in improving the facilities at Oriel Park. The disabled section, the away terrace, and toilet facilities being the priority. The UEFA fine will reduce the amount available for these improvements.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeverFeltBetter
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-b3XTj5G_SAQuote:
Originally Posted by White Horse
Except UEFA/FIFA are idiots, detached from reality. There is more to the world than their precious rules.Quote:
Originally Posted by GypsyBlackCat
As for sport and politics not 'mixing', good luck with that...