We carry the full text of Press release 56 came out today: you comments, I do not have more .......
2010/2011 football season Complaint against Asciano SS Virtus Virtus Race Result
Asciano - Fratta S. Catherine Del January 9, 2011 (. CU No. 51, 3 \\ 2 \\ 2011)
proposes SS Virtus Asciano ritual complaint against the decision of the GST of Tuscany, who, with a long and varied reasons dismissing the complaint of the same company, gave notice to the Virtus Asciano lost a penalty point in the standings and a fine of € 150.00 as the first waiver.
The measure stems from the GST contested race report, where the DG refers to the fact that the race was initially interrupted by the DG for his mistake on the same period. Realizing the error DG asked the teams to recur in the field and ascites and refused however, to that arbitrator no longer had the minimum number of players to continue the race. The complainant in asking for a repetition of the race, making a series of arguments regarding the role allegedly played in the affair by the commissioner of field (or rather an observer of Arbitration), whereas no detect here, emphasizes the fact that the game had been interrupted by the DG when there were seven minutes at the end for having miscalculated CUN 56, 3/3/2011 - page. 1896 the time duration of the meeting, said that the quorum was met and the players could not return to the field because no longer present in the locker room.
examined the CD acts decides to accept the claims.
And 'no doubt that the match was stopped at seven minutes to go to an error of DG, the same referee in his report gives feedback. The referee called several times from this CD to provide the supplemental report did not do so, at least according to the circumstances that led to the interruption of the race, while charges made in connection the disqualification of a player's Virtus Asciano (Mazzeschi Simone), however, supplement that helps in some way to clarify at least the appearance of the number of players available.
E 'disputed that the DG of all individually and as a result of a His technical error has whistled the end of the race early, as that is not in question, aware of the error (no matter if it assisted in the arbitration by the observer) has invited the teams to resume the meeting.
Reports the referee, was at the disposal of the company Fratta, there was a similar availability of Virtus Asciano and also (since Mazzeschi juncture in player be made worthy of expulsion) would have failed the quorum.
The CD notes that the analysis of the story is somewhat problematic, both for the objective difficulty of the case both for the lack of help provided by DG that after an initial supplement meager relative to the location of the player has no further reports. However, it is evident that the extra player on the team mean that the ax was no legal minimum number to continue the meeting. In fact, the ratio would be expelled four players arbitration ax one of which would be the one who after the race would hurt the DG.
The referee in charge on the position of that player says that he would have completed the race without being expelled. So one of two things: either the player was expelled and the new regulatory violation would
only aggravated the penalty in disciplinary, or had not been expelled, and then would have been only three players expelled and a fourth in field expulsion would not be less than the legal minimum for the continuation of the meeting.
Except that then the game was not terminated for lack of a quorum, we analyze the appearance of "waiver". According to the CD also waiver by ax can not be provided to that company lost the race.
fact, the DG should not be limited to encouraging captains to continue the race, but must ensure that players are still kept playing and the fact must indicate this on the report. AIA to the rule in regulation 7 (timekeeping) art. 4, which regulates the behavior that referees have to take in the event of a technical error regarding the duration of the meeting (exact case), reported as discriminating between legitimate and illegitimate behavior on the part of a
of teams (or of both), it is precisely the circumstance if the players are still required to play. In this occasion, the CEO should make mention of the relationship game.
In the case in point the DG says nothing about it and despite numerous calls for the establishment of the supplement, that further note was sent to the official CD and therefore must be assumed that ax players were not dressed for the game.
The GST in its decision, conscious of the importance of this difference, states that the players were dressed for the game, but that fact is highlighted by the complainant which (ironically ) argues that the GST was to be present at the race in order to make such a claim, given that the referee makes no mention about the relationship race. This approach can not 'to be logically acceptable. CUN 56, 3/3/2011 - page. 1897Concludendo, given the number of errors from both technical and behavioral part of the DG, as well as the above considerations regarding the incorrect statement about the lack of legal minimum, having regard to the affirmation of the GST incorrect about the possibility of players' Asciano to continue the race as dressed for the game, a claim which is not reflected in official acts, the CD believes that the race should be repeated.
PQM
The CD in upholding the complaint annulling the decision of the GST and the effect of repeat orders race Virtus Asciano - Fratta S. Catherine therefore cancel all sanctions. It has returned the protest fee.
0 comments:
Post a Comment