4thegame.com reports that FIFA President is threatening unprecedented repercussions if the English champions decide to pursue their protestations to the courts. FIFA statutes forbid clubs from taking civil action against their national associations, and the next acceptable course of action in the eyes of the world body, is to go to the Court of Arbitration for Sport in Lausanne - which is not unlike walking into a trap with their eyes wide open.
The plain fact is that the 8 month ban was slapped on Ferdinand with one eye on the political whims of Sepp Blatter (read my high road theory below), and another on the fact that this case sets a precedent given the reality that there really is no provision in the rule book for dealing with this case. By standing on the middle road, the independent disciplinary committee is merely highlighting its impotence in meting out a fair judgment based on the facts - which is: that the idea of Rio Ferdinand actually being guilty of taking drugs was never called into question and that the misdemeanors revolved around procedure and the young lad's stupidity.
The questions that need to be asked are:
1. How is FIFA above the law in this sense?
2. If there was no provision in footballing laws, how did the committee come up with the 8 month tenure? If he was guilty of taking banned substances, impose the maximum ban. If he was guilty of procedural non-observance, is a 8 month ban justified, if compared for instance to Roy Keane's punishment over the Haaland affair?
3. What are the powers of the FIFA President? Does he wield god-ly powers in such a way that all in the game are subservient to his dictatorial ways?
As I concluded before, Ferdinand will never get a fair hearing and the only way to mitigate this will be to revamp the current system starting from the helm of FIFA. In this sense, Ferdi will never walk alone.
No comments:
Post a Comment