Olympiakos Appeal

[THYRA13]

Well this brings me to another point I think everyone has missed.????

This decision pretty much only rejects the asfalistica metra for Kalamaria.

In other words it does not impose a temporary restraining order on Epos decision against Kalamaria.

It does not decide the appeal one way or another.

This can be decided at a future date or Kalamaria might choose to withdraw its appeal.

What upsets me is that all the interested parties and particularly EPO has not demanded in the past that the main appeal be ruled on by CAS before the end of the season.

It does not matter what you thing the decision should be.

It is unconscionable that Epo has not demanded that, especially with the championship and the playoffs on the line.

Very very strange indeed.

Kolokotroni:

If you are talking about "To deltio Athlitikis idiotitos" when you say Deltio,then this is clearly stated in the Epo governing documents ,in black and white, that this document allows the player to play for any one of its new team's groups ,A, youth and so on as long as it is allowed by that leagues rules.

My argument is that the player did not satisfy those rules.

If you are talking about something else please let me know so that I will be better informed.

As it stands now my info allows for no conclusion other than that Epo was not at fault.

Please let me know.

[Kolokotronis]

Right.

PERMITS the player to play for any SL team. Only if its REVOKED can he be deemed ineligible to play by EPO.

I'm pretty sure FIFA, UEFA, and EPO follow the same or similar guidlines as the USSF in similar matters. As a licensed USSF referee, I can tell you definitively that the players permission to play is ensured by his player pass. If I red card a player (as I did two weeks ago), I pull the pass which is sent to the respective league office. The league then imposes whatever penalty is called for, and I'm certain informs the USSF and state association. If that same player wanted to play in the next match for which he was penalized, he COULD NOT, as he doesn't have a pass to present to the referee. The league returns the pass to the club after the period of suspension and all conditions of suspension have been satisfied.

If the player pass or registration is NOT permission to play, what is then? Because in effect what you're saying is that once a player has been purchased, he's automatically eligible to play for his new team, which is absurd. There HAS to be some document or tangible piece of evidence which gives the player permission to play. That's why the player passport is issued, to assist the respective fa's in determining whether or not a registration pass should be issued.

Additionally, if his pass is NOT permission to play, why didn't EPO give written notification to Kalamaria that this player was ineligible? Or are we now to assume that every club is hence obligated to interpret EPO's bylaws and make legal determinations on eligiblity? To me, that again seems absurd. The team makes an application for a pass with all the players relevant documents. The league then either accepts or rejects this application, If it accepts it, it then issues a pass which is PERMISSION TO PLAY.

That's why there's the "fraud" provision in the procurement of player pass provision in EPO's own bylaws. Because if a club makes a fraudulent application, it could thus lead to EPO issuing a pass and allowing to play a player who is otherwise ineligible. So tell me where Kalamaria engaged in any fraud?

[Irlandos]

Se ligo tha kanoume to aspro mavro.

[THYRA13]

A red card or a revocation are not the only infractions that do not allow a player to play.

To give another example ,cumulative yellows from different games make him ineligible to play, yet his pass is not withdrawn by the ref who has no authority to do so in this case ,since he is not the one keeping count and presumably he does not know what the count is.

The team might and should be notified by the league of the players ineligibility in this case, but regardless of notification if the rules say that he will miss the next game after accumulating the yellows he better not play even if the team did not receive official notification.The team and the player are responsible for obeying the rules.If they break them then sanctions apply.Otherwise you the referee will be doing allot more than refereeing before the game and it is probably all wrong( not intensionally).

If an opposing team coach approaches you before the game and tells you that their opponents best player is ineligible would you let him play?

I certainly did let him play when this was before me when I used to referee.

They took their case to the state association after the game.This has happened to me several times.State assoc. are notorious for this( not formally informing the team ).

Things are not as simple as you present them to be.

So you see a players pass is permission to play as long as he is eligible.

If you thing that the presence of a players pass is de facto evidence of a player's eligibility you are dead wrong.

And yes the clubs are making interpretations of the rules and when a dispute arises the appropriate courts are involved.

This is what keeps the athletic courts occupied among others.

"Because in effect what you're saying is that once a player has been purchased, he's automatically eligible to play for his new team, which is absurd."

This is a total fabrication.I have stated the exact opposite in no uncertain terms.

A players transfer/purchase is not permission to play.

The deltio is , IF AND ONLY IF he is eligible under the rules, any and all of them.

Kalamaria might not have committed fraud.You seem to be trying to push this toward this end.

Sorry.

Fraud is not the exclusive reason for sanctioning a team or player.

misrepresentations ,misinterpretations( willful or not), player behavior,AND fraud are among some of the reasons to impose sanctions.

Are you saying "The team makes an application for a pass with all the players relevant documents. The league then either accepts or rejects this application, If it accepts it, it then issues a pass which is PERMISSION TO PLAY."

Are you saying that the league does require you, the team, to provide evidence as to how many teams the players has played for in a certain year?I do not think this is listed under required documents.

Do you know for a fact that Kalamaria despite this non requirement did indeed inform Epo about who the player had played for that year?

Not to my knowledge ,but I could be wrong.

[Guest TheLegend]

You all are saying what happened meanwhile what happened was told in CAS. No one here knows exactly what happened so the speculations should end ;)

First you all say CAS is right now CAS is wrong. The highest court, acknowledged by FIFA and UEFA to regulate FIFA AND UEFA rules decided that playing wallner was illegal because FIFA said so. Sorry manges but FIFA decides the rules not you guys

ANTE GIA ANTE GIA PROTALTHIMA XANA STO PIREA

[Crazy]

Greek translation of the CAS decision:

http://www.sportdog.gr/new/article.aspx?id=62823

:whistle: :whistle:

[cyberfish]

Thyra13 you seem to have come late to the discussion so maybe you missed some of the early posts.

Comparisons and examples are good to clarify points, but from my experience they often sidetrack the real issues.

Here is what the KAP says about player registrations (digging through my earlier posts... ok I found it):

Article 34 of KA

[cyberfish]

Thanks for the link Crazy.

Here is the link to the actual CAS decision in English:

http://www.tas-cas.org/d2wfiles/document/9...21130226486.pdf

As I am reading this, I found this one *very intersting* bit:

EPO is not the body that can validate the final league table. The Superleague (which at it says, is not an instrument of EPO, but an independent body) is responsible for validating the table. Now, could the superleage convene and vote to either disregard EPO's decisions? Not sure, but it's their league and they could do as they please. Could they pass a rule tomorrow to "maintain league integrity, we decide such and such"?

The decision makes clear that Kalamaria did not convince them that they could win the actual appeal against EPO. CAS so far only looked at the interim measures issue, and further say that Kalamaria may choose to still pursue their original appeal through the normal course.

[Crazy]

So,SL is the organization responsible for finalizing the standings and not EPO.Is it not Vardinogiannis the head chairman this year of SL??? :LOL: :LOL: :LOL:

[cyberfish]

So,SL is the organization responsible for finalizing the standings and not EPO.Is it not Vardinogiannis the head chairman this year of SL??? :LOL: :LOL: :LOL:

haha, Tziger can decree that the title goes to PAO because their players don't wear Gorgevic-style chin guards. That would be cool :LOL:

[Kolokotronis]

You all are saying what happened meanwhile what happened was told in CAS. No one here knows exactly what happened so the speculations should end ;)

First you all say CAS is right now CAS is wrong. The highest court, acknowledged by FIFA and UEFA to regulate FIFA AND UEFA rules decided that playing wallner was illegal because FIFA said so. Sorry manges but FIFA decides the rules not you guys

ANTE GIA ANTE GIA PROTALTHIMA XANA STO PIREA

No, CAS did not rule Wallner was ineligible.

CAS ruled that AEK and PAO did not conform to its appellate procedural guidelines and that Kalamaria did not name the appropriate party in its appeal. Therefore, they dismissed the matter.

CAS did rule that Kalamaria did not make a prima facie case based on the incomplete evidence they presented at the hearing.

It helps reading the decision first before commenting.

[Kolokotronis]

Well this brings me to another point I think everyone has missed.????

This decision pretty much only rejects the asfalistica metra for Kalamaria.

In other words it does not impose a temporary restraining order on Epos decision against Kalamaria.

It does not decide the appeal one way or another.

This can be decided at a future date or Kalamaria might choose to withdraw its appeal.

What upsets me is that all the interested parties and particularly EPO has not demanded in the past that the main appeal be ruled on by CAS before the end of the season.

It does not matter what you thing the decision should be.

It is unconscionable that Epo has not demanded that, especially with the championship and the playoffs on the line.

Very very strange indeed.

Kolokotroni:

If you are talking about "To deltio Athlitikis idiotitos" when you say Deltio,then this is clearly stated in the Epo governing documents ,in black and white, that this document allows the player to play for any one of its new team's groups ,A, youth and so on as long as it is allowed by that leagues rules.

My argument is that the player did not satisfy those rules.

If you are talking about something else please let me know so that I will be better informed.

As it stands now my info allows for no conclusion other than that Epo was not at fault.

Please let me know.

Well, apparently both you and I were mistaken on the above as a prerequisite for justiciabilty in CAS is a prima facie showing of a likelihood of success on the merits.

Kalamaria didn't even pass this hurdle.

btw, if any of Kalamaria's lawyers were working for me, they'd be looking for a job this morning. How the hell could they fail to name the proper party? If in doubt, name EVERYBODY and let CAS sort it out.

And how the hell did AEK's lawyers fail to include a prayer for relief in their appelate brief?

Like a Three Stooges rerun.

[Kolokotronis]

A red card or a revocation are not the only infractions that do not allow a player to play.

To give another example ,cumulative yellows from different games make him ineligible to play, yet his pass is not withdrawn by the ref who has no authority to do so in this case ,since he is not the one keeping count and presumably he does not know what the count is.

The team might and should be notified by the league of the players ineligibility in this case, but regardless of notification if the rules say that he will miss the next game after accumulating the yellows he better not play even if the team did not receive official notification.The team and the player are responsible for obeying the rules.If they break them then sanctions apply.Otherwise you the referee will be doing allot more than refereeing before the game and it is probably all wrong( not intensionally).

If an opposing team coach approaches you before the game and tells you that their opponents best player is ineligible would you let him play?

I certainly did let him play when this was before me when I used to referee.

They took their case to the state association after the game.This has happened to me several times.State assoc. are notorious for this( not formally informing the team ).

Things are not as simple as you present them to be.

So you see a players pass is permission to play as long as he is eligible.

If you thing that the presence of a players pass is de facto evidence of a player's eligibility you are dead wrong.

And yes the clubs are making interpretations of the rules and when a dispute arises the appropriate courts are involved.

This is what keeps the athletic courts occupied among others.

"Because in effect what you're saying is that once a player has been purchased, he's automatically eligible to play for his new team, which is absurd."

This is a total fabrication.I have stated the exact opposite in no uncertain terms.

A players transfer/purchase is not permission to play.

The deltio is , IF AND ONLY IF he is eligible under the rules, any and all of them.

Kalamaria might not have committed fraud.You seem to be trying to push this toward this end.

Sorry.

Fraud is not the exclusive reason for sanctioning a team or player.

misrepresentations ,misinterpretations( willful or not), player behavior,AND fraud are among some of the reasons to impose sanctions.

Are you saying "The team makes an application for a pass with all the players relevant documents. The league then either accepts or rejects this application, If it accepts it, it then issues a pass which is PERMISSION TO PLAY."

Are you saying that the league does require you, the team, to provide evidence as to how many teams the players has played for in a certain year?I do not think this is listed under required documents.

Do you know for a fact that Kalamaria despite this non requirement did indeed inform Epo about who the player had played for that year?

Not to my knowledge ,but I could be wrong.

I really don't know where you get this stuff from, but I will say this-

A players pass is NOT de facto permission to play, but at a minimum it is prima facie evidence of permission to play absent notification otherwise from the respective fa.

In the case of yellow cards, the league absolutely has to notify the team that the player is suspended. The player isn't suspended once the ref gives him that last yellow, but rather when the league makes a determination that he's accumulated too many. Part and parcel of that is the obligation of the league to send appropriate notice. And in any event, the two scenarios can be distinguished. in the yellow card scenario, there is no ambiguity and the club has means to keep track of how many have accumulated. In the Wallner case, there's a good faith question on the players eligibility status. The clubs interpretation of the transfer rulea may be different than EPO's. That's why EPO is given a PLAYER PASSPORT tracking transfer activity, to make such determinations, or at a minimum, to notify Kalamaria that there may be a problem with this player.

Lastly, if a player has a pass, he plays (when I ref). The ref's have no authority to make such determinations. The appeal gets lodged with the league office, not with the ref.

[AEKPROTATHLIMA]

Hmmmmmm this is intresting!!!! from SuperSport:

[THYRA13]

Greek team "paragontes" are prime candidates for the Jerry Spinger show.

Hold on to your hats the BS is going to fly from all directions.

And when our sport newspapers get going on this, forget about it.

Good thing Man U is playing this week against Barcha and Chelsea so that I can keep my mind of this mess.

[Guest TheLegend]

epo didnt rule. Cas did. But now cas is corrupt?

ANTE GIA ANTE GIA PROTATHLIMA XANA STO PIREA

[aditas]

...

EPO is not the body that can validate the final league table. The Superleague (which at it says, is not an instrument of EPO, but an independent body) is responsible for validating the table.

...

I read that as a "decision" that EPO has no authority to validate the league table. It follows, that points awarded in the past by EPO are invalid as well. So why in the hell did the SL adopt EPO's ruling?

I think we all know the answer :tdown:

[NYPAO13]

CAS has made it official, that even in the highest court our league is a joke :P :1eye:

[athinaios]

This is where Tzigger is a chicken. He has failed to PROTECT the club on numerous occasions. Which is another reason for his failed leadership. Now he talks about drastic changes, ..again! Tsk... :tdown:

I applaud AEK players for not wanting to participate in the playoffs. I'd wish PAO did the same.

1. EPO cannot issue a license and then panish the club for hiring/using the player. *

2. EPO cannot be the judge of its own mistake.

3. It's unethical to give 3 points to a team that didn't win those on the pitch, even if one team is indeed guilty (which Kalamaria wasn't).

4. Wallner did not give an unfair advantage to Kalamaria. Wasn't actually his sub that scored??!!

Instead of making the league better, those in charge have further damaged the reputation of the "super" :LOL: league. Add to this the crappy refering, the corrupt and shoddy characters involved, and you have a Karagiozi shack.

It's time that the fans object to this charade. Or, the question I'd like to ask: do we collectively get what we deserve?????? [emphasis on "collectively"]

* If I hire a person as a driver with a VALID d's license, I cannot be penalized if later it was found that he had obtained his license by fraud. The DMV and the law punishes the individuals, and they do NOT give my competition and extra points!!

Further, that driver (as far as I know) has not been charged with fraud! Right? Has Wallner been charged with fraud, or anything illegal????

I'm dropping this topic, because the more I talk about it the more I get upset! :angry:

[aekrossoponti]

i am somewhat lost here.

in any case Mehmet Hakki Hocaoglu wanted to transfer for the third time in the 07/08 season to rizespor. the turkish fa vetoed the move and he had to stay at samsunspor. a lesson from our neighbors.

[aditas]

...

The team might and should be notified by the league of the players ineligibility in this case, but regardless of notification if the rules say that he will miss the next game after accumulating the yellows he better not play even if the team did not receive official notification.The team and the player are responsible for obeying the rules.

That has nothing to do with a player's registration

If they break them then sanctions apply.Otherwise you the referee will be doing allot more than refereeing before the game and it is probably all wrong( not intensionally).

Your job on the field is to check for valid registrations, shinguards and studs. If YOU screw up in YOUR duties and allow play to go on, no one can award punitive damages to the victimized team.

If an opposing team coach approaches you before the game and tells you that their opponents best player is ineligible would you let him play?

NO

Things are not as simple as you present them to be.

Actually they are.

If you thing that the presence of a players pass  is  de facto evidence of a player's eligibility you are dead wrong.

If by "pass" you mean registration then you are the one that is wrong.

"Because in effect what you're saying is that once a player has been purchased, he's automatically eligible to play for his new team, which is absurd."

No one here made such claim

The deltio is , IF AND ONLY IF he is eligible under the rules, any and all of them.

Irrelevant, once issued it is a license to play, FIFA rules, no IFS ANDS or BUTS.

"The team makes an application for a pass with all the players relevant documents. The league then either accepts or rejects this application, If it accepts it, it then issues a pass which is PERMISSION TO PLAY."

YES

[aditas]

I applaud AEK players for not wanting to participate in the playoffs. I'd wish PAO did the same.

I would like to remind AEK players and fans, that the attempt to rob you of your title is happening under Tzigger's presidency. He has allowed this crap to happen.

[AEKPROTATHLIMA]

I applaud AEK players for not wanting to participate in the playoffs. I'd wish PAO did the same.

I would like to remind AEK players and fans, that the attempt to rob you of your title is happening under Tzigger's presidency. He has allowed this crap to happen.

I canot really agree with you on this because Tzigger is the president of Super League and NOT EPO. EPO is the one that gave the ok to Kalamaria for there player to play and EPO was the one that punish Kalamaria and gave the points to Olympiakos. Super League had NOTHING to do with this.!!!!!!

[cyberfish]

A players pass is NOT de facto permission to play, but at a minimum it is prima facie evidence of permission to play absent notification otherwise from the respective fa.

In the case of yellow cards, the league absolutely has to notify the team that the player is suspended. The player isn't suspended once the ref gives him that last yellow, but rather when the league makes a determination that he's accumulated too many. Part and parcel of that is the obligation of the league to send appropriate notice. And in any event, the two scenarios can be distinguished. in the yellow card scenario, there is no ambiguity and the club has means to keep track of how many have accumulated. In the Wallner case, there's a good faith question on the players eligibility status. The clubs interpretation of the transfer rulea may be different than EPO's. That's why EPO is given a PLAYER PASSPORT tracking transfer activity, to make such determinations, or at a minimum, to notify Kalamaria that there may be a problem with this player.

Lastly, if a player has a pass, he plays (when I ref). The ref's have no authority to make such determinations. The appeal gets lodged with the league office, not with the ref.

Good post. Right on the money.

Without resorting to examples I'll keep posting the passage from KAP:

Article 34 of KA

[aekrossoponti]

what sort of gets me, is one moment olympiakos call for the rules but then the next moment you have the rizoupoli massacre going on, which was elladistan at its best and would have aborted all over europe after the first whistle. then you have olympiakos saying how they are to good for the greek league and the weak greek league keeps them down. next moment they file a complaint against kalamarias.

i mean things like that happen losing games on paper. but in greece it shouldnt decide the outcome of the protathlima. in a country were the rules are set and implemented its ok to complain. but in greece were there basically are no rules its ridiculous to complain for someone allegedly breaking them.

in turkey the fa blocked a players transfer. here epo give wallner allowance and then deducts the points from kalamarias. the irony of it all is the first decision were epo decided to have the game repeated. whats the logic behind all those epo decisions.

i still remember how bayern once beat frankfurt in frankfurt 5-2. they then lost the game on papaer because trappatoni used four amateurs. only three were allowed. ridiculous but frankfurt got the points.