The supreme court has lowered the penalties for nine convicted in the case healththe first conviction on sports corruption issued in Spain for match fixing, in the 2013-2014 season, between the rojillo club and players from the Betis.
The Criminal Chamber has handed down a sentence that lowers the sentences that they ranged from 8 years and 8 months in prison to 9 months to a range of between 5 years and 7 months to 10 months in prison.
The Supreme Court has partially upheld the appeal of those convicted because it slightly reduces the penalties for the crime of falsehood (by establishing that those convicted of this crime can only be punished for one crime and not for two in competition as the Court appreciated) and for sports corruption as well as the fines.
The convicts are the ex-manager of the club Angel VizcayThe ex-president Miguel Archancoformer directors Juan Antonio Pascual and Jesús Peralta, former treasurer Sancho Bandrés, real estate agents Cristina Valencia and Albert Nolla, and former Betis players Antonio Amaya and Xabier Torres.
Who sees his sentence reduced the most is Vizcay, who goes from 8 years and 8 months in prison to 5 years and 7 months in prison; while Archanco goes from 6 years and 8 months to 5 years and 6 months in jail.
Bandrés drops from 5 years and 6 months to 4 years; Peralta from 6 years and 8 months to 5 years; while Pascual, who died in the summer, goes from 5 years and 6 months to 4 and 10. Former soccer players Amaya and Torres go from one year to 10 months and the two real estate agents from 9 to 6 months.
The Court of Navarre considered proven that the convictedmembers at that time of the Osasuna board of directors, agreed to reward two former Betis players -Amaya and Torres- with 650,000 euros, for encouraging their victory against Valladolid on matchday 37 of the 2013-2014 season and to let them win in the Pamplona game on matchday 38.
Prioritizing to win is not a crime
But now the Supreme Court lowers the sentences because contrary to the Court considers that letting yourself lose is a crime, but not the first to winsince the result does not depend on the athlete.
“A player can, with his performance, as a possible option, lose a match, but not win it. And you cannot win it because it does not depend exclusively on your will, but from other factors. And what cannot be achieved voluntarily, because it is impossible, cannot be penalized either,” explains the Chamber.
In this regard, the Supreme Court gives the following example: “In a soccer final, no matter how much money the players of one of the two competing teams are awarded, the result of winning the trophy that the competition consists of cannot be guaranteed” .
“But the opposite, it is in the hands of its protagonists, because just as you cannot ensure that you play well, the opposite does not happen, because it is perfectly executable play bad intentionally and let yourself win“, the sentence specifies.
The resolution says that the bonuses for losing a sports competition are criminally punishable, but, on the other hand, the bonuses for winning, whether concealed or offered by a third party to the club to which the players belong, cannot be, since such an incentive cannot be lawful when given by the club to which the player belongs and criminal when offered by a third party.
