The Committee maintains the yellow card for Vinicius because the provocation of the stands is not “applicable” as an “extenuating circumstance” to his protest to the referee
MADRID, 21 Mar. (EUROPA PRESS) –
The Competition Committee of the Royal Spanish Football Federation (RFEF) has sanctioned the FC Barcelona coach, Xavi Hernández, with a two-match suspension after the double warning he received at the Cívitas Metropolitano, in his team’s victory last weekend. of the week in LaLiga EA Sports, while the yellow card is not lifted for Real Madrid player Vinícius Jr for his protests to the referee.
As for Xavi Hernández, a repeat offender of expulsions this season, the Committee imposes a two-match ban on him – he will not be on the bench against Las Palmas or Cádiz – after being sent off in the duel against Atlético de Madrid (0-3 ) from last Sunday. Sanction that will end just before the Classic on April 21 in Madrid.
“Xavi was initially reprimanded for formulating or making observations, gestures or objections to the referee, and was finally sent off due to protests to the fourth official, who asked the main referee to caution the player from Terrassa and expel him from the match.
The committee considers that a two-game suspension should be applied for “protests against the referee, with an additional fine of €700 for the club and €600 for the offender.”
Xavi was sent off in the 42nd minute of the match for, according to the referee’s report, the following reason: “making comments of a technical nature to one of my decisions, shouting, making inconsiderate gestures and after having been previously warned by the 4th referee”.
The Blaugrana club alleged the existence of a manifest material error to request the annulment of the suspension, but the graphic evidence in which they claim that the coach “did not shout or make gestures of inconsideration at the fourth referee” has been denied by the Competition Committee .
From the ‘culer’ entity they believe that Xavi “limited himself to expressing his surprise and disbelief at the referee’s decision”, expressing himself “naturally in a gesture that in no case can be considered inconsiderate.” The club also denies that it shouted at the fourth official or any other member of the refereeing team.
However, Competition assures that the “repeated viewing” of the images has not allowed us to conclude, beyond all doubt, that the action that led to the expulsion did not occur as described by the referee and, ultimately, prove the error. manifest material in the arbitration report.
“That is, given that it only shows the final seconds of the aforementioned action, and not what happened immediately before, this disciplinary body has not been able to conclude that the coach did not participate in the conduct that the referee accuses him of. Therefore, the dismissal of the allegations and maintenance of the disciplinary consequences of the action indicated in the arbitration report,” the Committee noted.
THE SANCTION FOR VINÍCIUS JR IS MAINTAINED.
On the other hand, the Competition Committee also maintains the yellow card for Real Madrid player Vinícius Jr., seen for angrily protesting the referee and laughing in the referee’s face. An action (the reprimand) that the white club denounced only to be met with absolute rejection from LaLiga and the rest of the clubs in the competition, which support the referee Martínez Munuera.
Given the allegations of Real Madrid Club de Fútbol regarding the warning, the Disciplinary Committee considers that the Brazilian player’s yellow card should be maintained.
“The alleging club points out in its letter that the cautioned player has been regularly enduring acts of racism, hatred and intolerance in all the football fields that Real Madrid visits, also stating that ‘the absolute passivity of the referee team and of the Federation itself’ and that ‘said lack of protection and passivity is evidenced in the repeated complaints that this party has had to file with the State Attorney General’s Office in response to events that are repeated match after match, without the referees recording the violent acts, xenophobic and racist in the party minutes, whitewashing them’,” explains the Committee.
After this, Real Madrid points out that specifically, the player, after scoring the goal that opened the scoring for his team, received the insult of “son of a bitch” and that at minute 36:45 of the match, chants were uttered against the player with the following message: “Vinicius die, Vinicius die.”
“In relation to the warning shown to the Player in the 43rd minute, it is alleged that ‘it occurred a few minutes after the Player heard, in a choral and perfectly audible manner, the chant of ‘Vinicius die, Vinicius die’,” Competition points out. to the defense of the white club.
In this sense, Real Madrid adds that Vini Jr.’s attitude towards the referee “is nothing more than the result of frustration and helplessness” upon verifying the referee’s obvious passivity regarding the chants that were being uttered against him and that “The attitude of the player for which he was reprimanded was preceded by sufficient provocation, which is none other than chants wishing him death.”
The response of the Competition Committee is that, despite considering and taking into account that the “flawed attitude of the player is the product and consequence of sufficient provocation on the part of the rival team’s fans” and that the chants alleged by the white club ” They are undoubtedly intolerable and reprehensible” and deserve a disciplinary procedure, the yellow card should not be removed.
“Regarding the warning that is appealed here, not only is the presumption of veracity of the arbitration report not undermined, but it is recognized that the protest existed, although it would be the result of frustration and helplessness upon verifying the obvious passivity of the referee regarding of the chants that were being uttered against him.’ Such a factual circumstance of passivity, of enormous gravity, is not at all accredited and it is also clear that every professional player knows, or should know, the result of the action of protesting to the referee. “, defends Competition.
“Whatever the reasons that could be given to justify such a protest, it is also clear that in our legal system it cannot be invoked that an infraction is taking place, no matter how reprehensible it may be, to justify committing another one. Finally, it is understood “that sufficient provocation is not applicable as a mitigating circumstance, since the sanction of reprimand does not allow degrees in its imposition. Therefore, the allegations made must be rejected,” the Committee states in its resolution.
2024-03-21 11:55:53
#Competition #sanctions #Xavi #parties
