Still nothing official on their site
http://www.uefa.org/disciplinary/index.html
Printable View
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...