Did Leyendeker Get It Cheap ?: Because They Wanted To Give Him 16 Dates After Brutal Zeballos Soccer

The The disciplinary court needed more than one meeting to address the “Leyendeker case”. There have been several meetings and without a shared idea among its members: two of the five expressed theirs dissidence in the sentence, whose justification exceeded the arbitration report and was supported by television images, newspaper articles and medical reports.

For when the referee’s sheet Massimiliano Ramirez was loaded into the system, the issue was already a public debate: the action of the game was tirelessly reproduced on television and social networks and there was also the version that a bet could have motivated the unexpected infringement, which was first sanctioned with a yellow card and then it turned red.

The eventual penalty arc is established by art article 199 from Regulation of transgressions and sanctions: sanction the Unfairplaya minimum of five dates and a maximum of 30 are foreseen. And on this point the Court did not have a uniform position.

Of the five members who signed the sentence, two expressed their dissent. The President of the Court, Fernando Mitjansand members Eduardo Bozzi Y Gerardo Gomez Coronado they believed that the eight dates – which could have been even seven – were sufficient to sanction the infringement. On the other hand, for the vice president Sergio Fernandez Y Jorge Gallellimore parts were needed.

“I think it is appropriate to set a penalty of 16 dates disqualification, applicable to all official tournaments “, said Fernández, who came to court for the interference of Daniel Angelici, then president of Boca and vice president of the AFA.

“I believe the sanction should be extended to nine (9) suspension dates, and this is because I believe player Milton Ramón Leyendeker must no longer play in any official AFA competition of the current yearGallelli noted.

How was the sentence established?

“After 8 minutes of play I expelled the number 2 player of the Agropecuario LEYENDEKER, Milton Ramón for serious play. It is worth remembering that the player who received the infringement of ZEBALLOS, Oscar Exequiel, had to be assisted by the medical staff and left the playing field injured without returning after the infringement “, reads part of the referees’ report. That was the trigger for everything.

The court sent a communication to Boca asking for the diagnosis of Zeballos, which the club returned with the details and prognosis of his return to sport, estimated in a period of “four to six months”. In parallel, it provisionally suspended Leyendeker and invited him to grant the relevant discharge.

At that point, the members of the Tribunal knew that the sanction could not be less than four dates, the minimum to liquidate the “Unfairplay” recorded in the Ramírez report.

“(…) I had no intention of causing the aforementioned injury, the result of a misfortune, a product of the game itself”, reads the letter that bears the signature of the disqualified player, in which he also added that his was not . It is a violent profile, a position that he based on the “lack of expulsions and sanctions in the sports field”. Leyendeker asked for the sanction to come into effect in the Argentine Cup “because it was the area where the foul occurred”.

Why did the penalty go beyond the Cup?

Although Article 28 of the Argentine Cup Regulations states that “the penalties applied in the context of the Argentine Cup (…) will be fulfilled in the same, not reaching participation in other competitions”, the opposite occurred on request of the player. What happened then?

“We are in sight of a serious action that deserves to resort to FIFA’s recommendations in a case not covered by the Argentine Cup Rules and then appeal to parallelism with other exceptions for serious crimes covered by the AFA Rules (…) and CONMEBOL Code Disciplinary “, details the sentence.

“The seriousness of the crime committed deserved to exempt the provision contained in the aforementioned Special Bulletin from the application of the recommendations and regulations of FIFA and CONMEBOL for the judgment of serious crimes”, underlines the same sentence. And in this sense, the South American body provides that “in the event of infringements deemed serious (…) the sanction can be extended indiscriminately to different categories of competitions”.

This position, however, is endorsed in thea 1994 FIFA recommendation for serious offenses committed in friendlies. “He cannot intervene in an official match of any division, as long as he has not served the penalty in full. To this end, the official matches played by the same team composed by the player at the time of the infringement will also be counted and in this case, it will be taken into account jointly of official and friendly matches ”, reads the aforementioned text.

From 5 to 30 dates

The considerations of FIFA and Conmebol are the support on which Article 199 of the regulation that applies to Leyendeker rests. “Suspension from five to thirty games to the player who, by violent action, prohibited by the Game Rules or by aggression, leaves another in inferior condition or unable to continue the dispute of the match or prevented from being able to play for an indefinite period of time “indicates a failure. At this point the position of the five members of the Court ceased to be homogeneous.

Both the review of the television images and the comments of journalists and spectators of the match played between the Agropecuario and Boca Juniors clubs on 10 August did nothing but reiterate the content of the referees’ report, and in particular the definition of serious rough play ” another paragraph that contradicts a position that the court itself endeavors to install: that only the arbitrator’s report has weight at the time of judgment.

In any case, the majority position of the Court that prevented the punishment from being more severe, contemplated “the scope of the game, the intentionality and that there are no records of previous sanctions of the aggressor”.