|
|
This forum is read-only now. Please use Forum 2 for new posts
| xml |
No replies possible in the archive |
|
Author: AlanK
Date: 30-07-2013, 15:29
| Hadn't heard anything about this in quite a while:
Today, July 30, Rayo Vallecano presented their case to the TAS in a three-hour session.
The decision will be given tomorrow, July 31: does Rayo play in the EL this year? Of course, the first game of QR3, in which they theoretically would have to partcipate, is Thursday, with Sevilla already set to play in Sevilla vs Mladost Podgorica.
Seems as this was all left a bit late . . . |
|
Author: Forza-AZ
Date: 30-07-2013, 16:24
| It's to late to let Mladost play Vallecano on Thursday. But maybe UEFA can postpone the 1st leg to Sunday (?). That would give Mladost enough time to change their plans and travel to Madrid. |
|
Author: AlanK
Date: 31-07-2013, 15:16
| The non-decision of TAS with regard to Rayo:
TAS ruled that it does not consider it to be within their "jurisdiction" to rule on the concession of a Uefa license to Rayo. So as far as I can figure out, the possibility of Rayo playing in the EL is still open, but I have no idea where it's going from here. Nice job, TAS--NOT! Why all this waiting to find that they refuse to rule? |
|
Author: shisraelit
Date: 31-07-2013, 16:20
| Why uefa don t permit rayo to play in el until the final decision like fenerbache and besiktas? |
|
Author: AlanK
Date: 31-07-2013, 16:49
| Because Rayo does not have the requisite license. |
|
Author: Forza-AZ
Date: 31-07-2013, 16:52
| There is a difference of course. Rayo didn't get a license (so far), so can't play in EL.
Fenerbahçe and Besiktas did get a licence, but were banned because of another issue. So they can play in EL (so far). |
|
Author: bert.kassies
Date: 31-07-2013, 20:24
| And it is not UEFA that denied a license to Rayo Vallecano but the license and appeal committees of the Spanish FA. |
|
Author: AlanK
Date: 31-07-2013, 22:40
| @bert:
Do you know what is left to Rayo to do? My sources all say they'll keep on with their efforts to be able to play the EL, but none seems to give a clue as to what that might be.
Sources: Rayo website, marca.com, as.com, sport.es |
|
Author: bert.kassies
Date: 31-07-2013, 22:56
| @AlanK
No, I really don't know what they can do more. It is UEFA that monitors the license process that is being implemented by the national associations. If something in the process went wrong they might ask UEFA to look at it. But in general UEFA will not reopen the case.
It depends of course on the specific case. Why does Rayo think that they deserve a license? If it is because they have solved some financial problem now, but didn't before June they will have no chance. |
|
Author: AlanK
Date: 01-08-2013, 16:15
| @bert:
Thanks for the feedback. I'm in favor of the whole mess ending here--let's get on with it and play fútbol. Never seen such a jam-up of results/eligibility being decided in the boardrooms/courtrooms before! |
|
Author: Ricardo
Date: 06-08-2013, 15:08
| When will TAS will do their say about Fenerbahce and Besiktas? That item still hangs out in the open doesn't it?
I still think it is weird UEFA says no, but because they protested it is changed in a yes, until TAS do their verdict? SO for Fener and Besik it is in their interest to slow it down???? |
|
Author: Forza-AZ
Date: 06-08-2013, 16:53
| The verdict from CAS will be in the last week of August (so around the time Fenerbahçe and Besiktas play the return of CL/EL Q4).
You are correct that the clubs have something to win to slow the CAS appeal down, since they can at least get the match revenues now for Q3 and/or Q4. |
|
Author: bert.kassies
Date: 06-08-2013, 17:12
| The fact that the ban is not enforced by UEFA seems to be an agreement between all parties involved (see goal.com article). And so might be the time of the verdict. CAS explicitly declared that the final decision will be issued before the GS draws.
This new procedure is quite in contrast with the Sion case in 2011 when CAS tried to put pressure on UEFA to lift the ban until the final decision of CAS. And UEFA administration responded that they didn't have the authority to overrule the decision of their Disciplinary Body and Appeal Body. |
|
|