Champions League 2014/5

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gather round

I'm sure most NI fans would agree the IFA were deserving of ridicule both before and after the limits you mention.

---

Would they actually? I thought one of the reasons the IFA took Kearns, the FAI and FIFA to CAS was to appease their faithful; to "look to be doing something on the issue".

Legia's appeal has been thrown out by UEFA, according to reports in Poland: http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/f...appeal-4047564

Not surprising really. I assume further information will become available later this afternoon.

Some comical quotes here from their owner yesterday: http://www1.skysports.com/football/n...a-appeal-fails

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sky Sports

The Polish club's co-owner Dariusz Mioduski told Sky Sports News: "We will take it all the way. If we are not successful today, as I hope we will be, we will take it to the Court of Arbitration in Lausanne because we believe we are in the moral right.

"This is not only about that. If we are forced to play in the Europa cup we will do so and will abide with whatever the final (CAS) decision is but we believe what has happened in this case is a bigger issue."

Mioduski was adamant his club had acted in good faith and added: "We haven't really broken the rules. I think we are quite sure that if UEFA looks at the situation and the facts they will see the rule that was broken could easily be misinterpreted. This is what happened in our case.

"Basically what it comes down to is the interpretation. It's a clerical mistake, a misunderstanding on our side but a misunderstanding also on the interpretation on the UEFA side which we are trying to clarify.

"The facts are that the player actually served the suspension so I think the spirit of the regulations whatever, however, it was interpreted was a guess and this is what we will try and show.

"I would say we are cautiously optimistic (on the outcome of the hearing). We have acted in good faith. Our argument basically goes to the questions of the interpretation of the regulation.

"If they had a bit more time they would not have taken that decision and we are looking for them for proportion. In other words, even if there was a mistake it cannot result in such a harsh penalty."

---

They "haven't really broken the rules" and the guy already "served the suspension"? Ha, what planet is he on? He obviously has little comprehension of what the role of CAS entails either; the court's role is simply to adjudge whether or not the applicable rules and regulations agreed by both parties have been correctly followed. It's role is not to offer a verdict based on what it might think the "fairest" or "most moral" outcome would have been. If Legia take moral issue with the regulations, they shouldn't have signed up in the first place.

By the way, does anyone know where I can find the wording of the regulation that outlines that a suspension can only be served so long as the suspended player is registered for a fixture and sits it out? Will have a better look myself later. Am just on one of the work computers at the minute and they're horribly slow and limited.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DannyInvincible

By the way, does anyone know where I can find the wording of the regulation that outlines that a suspension can only be served so long as the suspended player is registered for a fixture and sits it out? Will have a better look myself later. Am just on one of the work computers at the minute and they're horribly slow and limited.

---

This seems to have it:

http://transfersblog.com/1980,celtic...ally-all-about

Quote:

---

Legia have been sanctioned for fielding a suspended player (article 18 of the UEFA Champions League regulations and article 21 of the Disciplinary Regulations). The match has been declared as forfeit meaning Legia Warszawa have lost the match 3-0.
...
Pursuant to article 18 par. 1 of Regulations of the UEFA Champions League, 2012-15 Cycle, 2014/15 Season:

In order to be eligible to participate in the UEFA club competitions, players must be registered with UEFA within the requested deadlines to play for a club and fulfil all the conditions set out in the following provisions. Only eligible players can serve pending suspensions.

---

http://www.uefa.com/MultimediaFiles/...4_DOWNLOAD.pdf

Page 27.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gather round

You're unusually naive about the FAI case. They asked Blatter for a private meeting AFTER criticising FIFA as both incompetent and dishonest, then put a proposal that was absurd. Unsurprisingly, he turned a situation of minor embarrassment for himself into one of ridicule for Delaney. Yes, someone a bit gentler and less ruthless might have just dismissed the idea in private, but you knew in advance that he was a cynical machine politician. Not the Citizen's Advice Bureau.

---

Great response as ever to the previous points about your own bizarre fixation. Not.

As for Delaney, yeah he was an eejit about obvious cheating, as was Bl*tter too. A worse case than LW's as theirs was more of an 'administrative error'.
However, the affect of the IFA's inertia is potentially much more damaging to them long-term as a credible organisation. And rightly so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DannyInvincible

Would they actually? I thought one of the reasons the IFA took Kearns, the FAI and FIFA to CAS was to appease their faithful; to "look to be doing something on the issue".

---

They would. The list of administrative and other ****-ups is long and largely unrelated to the eligibility issue. Massive payments to redundant staff, legal action by an outgoing CEO and significant delays in rebuilding WP to give just three recent examples. And I've mentioned them booking into a Spanish hotel where the receptionists didn't speak English? Luckily Gerry Armstrong and I turned up just in time to order Jim Boyce his lunch while collecting our tickets.

Football authorities tend to be unpopular, given that they take us for granted merely as a source of income. But some are even less competent than others.

An attempted populist stunt doesn't really change that, particularly when it was so obviously pointless, not to mention vindictive. They'd have been better off taking Ardee's advice and recognising their own inertia.

Except that Spanish story is around 10 years old, give them some credit...
Surely?

And LW's expulsion confirmed fwiw.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gather round

An attempted populist stunt doesn't really change that, particularly when it was so obviously pointless, not to mention vindictive. They'd have been better off taking Ardee's advice and recognising their own inertia.

---

In hindsight, would most NI fans look back upon the IFA's CAS action with a regretful sense of embarrassment or do they think, "well, fair play; we gave it a go but it didn't work out for us"? Or, worse, is there still an over-riding sense of "but even CAS admitted it was an unfair one-way situation!"? Most would acknowledge that the rules in place were/are being correctly applied, right?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by osarusan

This seems to have it:

http://transfersblog.com/1980,celtic...ally-all-about





http://www.uefa.com/MultimediaFiles/...4_DOWNLOAD.pdf

Page 27.

---

Cheers. I don't see how those words could be "easily misinterpreted". There's no ambiguity. They're perfectly clear and comprehensible.

What is Mioduski referring to when he mentions "a misunderstanding also on the interpretation on the UEFA side which [Legia] are trying to clarify"? Is he trying to claim that it might actually be UEFA who are misinterpreting the rule, in spite of admitting a clerical mistake and misunderstanding on the Legia side? He can't have it both ways.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DannyInvincible

In hindsight, would most NI fans look back upon the IFA's CAS action with a regretful sense of embarrassment or do they think, "well, fair play; we gave it a go but it didn't work out for us"? Or, worse, is there still an over-riding sense of "but even CAS admitted it was an unfair one-way situation!"? Most would acknowledge that the rules in place were/are being correctly applied, right?

---

I'm guessing a mixture of embarrassment with the IFA and anger at some individuals (Delaney, James McRodriguez etc.) :shame:

Isn't this, er, an 'eligibility' issue...

No surprise here, but CAS have rejected the notion of any possible Legia re-instatement: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/28839720

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BBC

A statement issued by Cas on Monday afternoon said: "The President of the CAS Appeals Arbitration Division considered the parties' written submissions and has denied Legia Warszawa's request.

"Accordingly, Celtic FC remains qualified to participate in the UEFA Champion's League 2014/2015 and will play its next match against NK Maribor on 20 August 2014."

On submitting their case to Cas, Legia had stated: "We believe that Cas will investigate the case mainly on the level of rationality and proportionality of the decisions of Uefa disciplinary body and the spirit of the game. We still hope that finally football and fair-play will win."

They expected that, had Cas decided they had a case worthy of further investigation, that it would expect it to be concluded "within the regular period of three months".

---

It seems a case will go ahead though in the meantime. However, based on the applicable regulations, I just can't see how CAS will have the scope or remit to make considerations or recommendations based upon external notions of "rationality and proportionality" (even if they were to first agree that the punishment is disproportionate).

Edit: Some more here: http://news.stv.tv/west-central/2887...reinstatement/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by STV

Celtic’s UEFA Champions League play-off match against Maribor will go ahead on Wednesday after Legia Warsaw’s latest appeal was rejected.

The Polish club had taken their bid to be reinstated in the competition to the Court of Arbitration for Sport, asking for provisional measures to be applied before their case against UEFA was heard in full.

Those measures, including their reinstatement at Celtic’s expense or the postponement of Celtic’s tie, have been rejected by the arbitration body at a hearing in Lausanne on Monday.

A statement from CAS read: "The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) has denied the urgent request for provisional measures filed by the Legia Warszawa SA in the course of its appeal against the UEFA Appeals Body decision of 13 August 2014.

"The UEFA Appeals Body had confirmed the result 3-0 (forfeit) in favour of Celtic FC against Legia in the second leg of the third qualifying round of the UEFA Champions League. The UEFA considered that Legia had fielded an ineligible player (Bartosz Bereszynski) during the match.

"Legia Warszawa filed an appeal to the CAS at 17:30 on 15 August 2014 together with an urgent application for provisional measures requesting that it be provisionally admitted to participate in UEFA Champions League matches until the CAS renders its final arbitral award.

"The appeal is directed against UEFA and Celtic FC which were invited to comment on the Polish club’s request until 13:00 (Swiss time) today.

"The President of the CAS Appeals Arbitration Division considered the parties’ written submissions and has denied Legia Warszawa’s request.

"Accordingly, Celtic FC remains qualified to participate in the UEFA Champions League 2014/2015 and will play its next match against NK Maribor on 20 August 2014.

"The CAS arbitration will now continue and a panel of arbitrators will be constituted to examine this case within the next weeks.

"On the merits, Legia has requested that no sanctions be imposed on either the club or the player Bereszynski and that UEFA be ordered to pay a financial compensation to the Polish club."

Legia could yet apply to a court of law in Switzerland for an injunction against the determination but, given UEFA's stance on such matters being dealt with outside of the game, it is unclear whether the club will pursue that course of action.

Legia were sanctioned by UEFA for fielding a suspended player against Celtic in the qualifying rounds of the competition, allowing Celtic to progress despite a 6-1 aggregate defeat on the pitch.

Their appeal to UEFA to overturn the decision to forfeit the match failed on Thursday and the club followed up on its promise to exhaust every possible appeal by escalating the matter to CAS.

UEFA and Celtic had been invited to file written observations but CAS did not disclose details of the evidence presented.

---

They're now seeking CAS to order a payment of compensation from UEFA...

Barca ban upheld. No new players for the next two transfer windows: Jan 2015 and July 2015.

http://www.independent.ie/incoming/b...-30523476.html

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BonnieShels

Barca ban upheld. No new players for the next two transfer windows: Jan 2015 and July 2015.

http://www.independent.ie/incoming/b...-30523476.html

---

bit of a joke .. they get banned appeal it and while under appeal sign 8 players ? and have untill this transfer window closes to sign any other players

It is a joke. But in saying that would you have expected anything else.

"MORE THAN A CLUB"

Not good enough, a pile of pish.

Now Desmond must spend. And get a decent manager.

It might well take a while.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArdeeBhoy

Not good enough, a pile of pish.

Now Desmond must spend. And get a decent manager.

It might well take a while.

---

Is he that bad? I've seen nothing of Celtic this year.

Admittedly what I've read about Celtic doesn't fill me with confidence for the rest of the season under him.

Desmond is...

Deila doesn't seem to have a clue what he's doing, but then again he doesn't really have a great record to start with. You get the feeling if he's given two years in charge, you'll eventually end up with a team packed with Scandinavians on loan chasing third spot.

Except if he doesn't win the SPL, there won't be a second year...

The jury is out, more now as he's been perceived as 'Yes' man to the Celtic board, rather than any lack of experience or tactical acumen.
Which seem equally valid criticisms.