The RFEF Competition Committee has agreed this Wednesday to sanction the Betis player Sergio Canales with a four-game suspension for some statements, about an expulsion received in October, which he made after the match of day 22 of LaLiga Santander played against Valladolid on February 18.
After said meeting, Canales said, regarding his expulsion in the match on October 19 against Cádiz, that the referee, Antonio Mateu Lahoz, had it “premeditated”. He was sent off in that match, on matchday ten, in the 98th minute for a double warning; the first for “making observations on arbitration decisions” and the second, for “reiterating his observations on arbitration decisions after having been warned”.
In its resolution this Wednesday, the Competition points out that in its statements to a Canales television channel, it said verbatim: “… and today, well, it is true that it is something different, no, in the end it is true that I am the captain and I have that many times that (…) with the referee and in this case I had already said that I was not going to do it because I feel that it was not appropriate and in the end, I think that this time that expulsion from my point of view was premeditated”.
Although the Competition recognizes that “said statements would be protected by the right to freedom of expression”, “with regard to the sports field, in certain cases, in effect, certain statements, in this case against members of the arbitration group, will deserve disciplinary reproach when the disciplinary norms that sanction certain manifestations that are directed against people who exercise arbitration or disciplinary functions are applicable to the person who carries them out, as a consequence of the federative bond.
“In this context, and from the disciplinary-sporting point of view, the current article 106 of the current Disciplinary Code of the RFEF classifies as a serious infraction the statements made by any person subject to sports discipline, through any means, that question the honesty and impartiality of any member of the arbitration group or of the RFEF bodies, as well as statements that imply disapproval of the activity of any member of the aforementioned groups when they are made with contempt or when offensive language is used, insulting, humiliating or rude,” the committee explains.
It also considers that “the statements that are at the origin of this file exceed the limits of healthy and legitimate criticism that protects the right to freedom of expression. The attribution of premeditation to the collegiate – that is, indicating that he had thought the decision in a careful and careful way before adopting- clearly questions his impartiality and honesty when he is accused of a kind of fraudulent attitude when adopting the decision”.
“It agrees, in particular, with the conclusion that in this case there is no doubt about the nature and scope of the statements. In particular, it is suggested that the referee did not make a mistake, but deliberately failed to comply with one of the functions entrusted to it by federative regulations, specifically, that which is included in article 237.2.e) of the RFEF General Regulations: “reprimand or expel, depending on the importance of the offense, any footballer who observes incorrect conduct or proceed in an inconvenient way and also to coaches, assistants and other people statutorily affected”, he emphasizes.
In addition, it recalls that “the statements of the file, which he himself later admitted were unfortunate, can be considered as attacks on the integrity of the arbitration group, by questioning its impartiality. “It is true that obviously foul-sounding or insulting language is not used, but it is also that the impartiality and honesty of the arbitrator is explicitly questioned”, he says.
By virtue of the foregoing, the Competition Committee agrees to impose a four-match suspension on Canales and a fine of 601 euros. And remember that “against this resolution it is possible to file an appeal before the Appeals Committee within ten business days, counting from the day after the notification is received.”
