On Friday, the appeal negotiation against the judgment of the DFB sports court in the lighter scandal game between Union Berlin and VfL Bochum-the background.
What happened on December 14th?
In the game of Union Berlin against VfL Bochum, Bochum’s goalkeeper Patrick Drewes had been touched by a lighter that had flown from the Berlin fan curve. Referee Martin Petersen continued the game after a long break at the score of 1-1. The two teams closed a “non -aggression pact” and only pushed the ball back and forth. Drewes had left the place at that time. Because the Bochum’s contingent was exhausted, center forward Philipp Hofmann went into the goal.
What happened with that Lighter thrower?
The lighter thrower was determined by video recordings and identified during the game and handed over to the police. Union Berlin excluded the 27 -year -old from the club and imposed a nationwide ban on stadium for three years – the long -possible duration for such a ban. There were criminal charges against the thrower of trespassing and dangerous bodily harm.
How did the first judgment be?
The DFB sports court rated the game 2-0 for Bochum on January 9th. Bochum saw it as weakened because instead of the goalkeeper, a field player went between the posts and VfL finished the game with ten men. For this, the host and liable association Union Berlin is to blame for this.
Who has appealed?
Union had appealed immediately after the judgment in January. Holstein Kiel and FC St. Pauli joined. The two clubs are indirectly affected in the relegation battle if your basement competitor VfL Bochum gets all three points at the green table instead of one point. Your interest is obvious, but how you want to justify your actual participation in the procedure is unclear.
When does the session increase and who leads it?
The date was scheduled for February 28 from 12.30 p.m. at the DFB campus in Frankfurt. The meeting heads Oskar Riedmeyer, the chairman of the DFB Federal Court. Arno Heger and ex-professional Carsten Ramelow act as an assessor. who used to play for Bayer Lewverkusen and Union Archrival Hertha BSC.
What speaks for VfL Bochum?
For the VfL, the DFB speaks that the DFB could have the opinion that a hard judgment had to be deterrent to fans. The fact that Drewes could have acted, especially since his teammate Felix Passlack talked to him for a long time right after the throw was quite an issue immediately after the game in the catacombs – at least nobody speaks of it in the public. Sure, this question will not matter in court.
What speaks for Union Berlin?
If referee Petersen had broken off the game, the case would have been clear: Bochum would have got the points because Berlin is liable for the launcher from the Union Fan Curve- the basis is paragraph 9a of the legal and procedural order, the association and its regulatory service does not have to be proven to be fault. Sports lawyer Paul Lambertz to RBB: “In this case, however, the referee – although he saw that the Bochum keeper was hit – decided with his assistants and in consultation with the” Cologne Keller “that this game is not canceled. The DFB regulations do not provide for this. The first instance obviously found it so unfavorable that they felt that they felt this injustice. Served and shortened an analogy: the game should have been canceled and Union would have been in debt.
How does Union justify the objection?
Union President Dirk Zingler justifies the objection by the fact that the throw of an object was not to be prevented by any organizer. For “However, he keeps it much worse “,” if someone tries to get an advantage from these events. “Zingler continues:” We expose ourselves to the risk that in the future the teams’ sporting performance will not decide how a game will work out, but possible abuses, insults, smoke or the throw of an object. Whether there is an impairment or weakening for one side, whether the game is canceled or continued, must always be the sole decision of the referee. If the beneficial party can explain their weakening themselves, we no longer need an impartial referee, the fraud and lubricating theater is open the door and gate. The disadvantaged parties will never be able to prove the opposite. “
What does VfL Bochum think?
According to the Union statement, the VfL made it clear on its homepage, “The fact that he knows the situation – to be punished on the basis of a single offender – from his own experience. This is why the club has never shown his fingers to those responsible for the Union, made blame or allegations, but has only been met with his duty against his own fans and members to maintain the interests of the association.” (…) One wondering about the statements of Berlin club managers. “Even if a complete reversal of the perpetrator-victim role has now taken place in many places, VfL will not be provoked or stimulated to protect its players. We accept the DFB set of rules and have full confidence that sports jurisdiction will continue to apply it correctly.”
What would the effects be in relegation battle?
Since the first instance judgment has not yet had any legal force due to the Berlin appeal, the current table is taken into account 1: 1. If Bochum would now get three points instead of one, VfL would pass the 1. FC Heidenheim and land in 16th place. Union lost a place in two points and a rating of 0: 2 and then there was 14th place because of the less shot goals behind the TSG 1899 Hoffenheim.
Is this negotiation really the last?
The Federal Supreme Court is the last instance within the DFB. An additional appeal would be possible before the constant neutral arbitration tribunal for clubs and corporations, and the passage to the International Sports Court of CAS is also conceivable.
How was decided in comparable cases?
In fact, the lighter throwing is far from the first Sknadal of this kind that gave German football clubs. Coladoses, small schnapps bottles, golf balls, chestnuts, dry ice pieces, a chocolate bar of the “Snickers” variety, coins, beer cups. In most cases there were repetitions, as well as fines, partial fan exclusions, even space blocks. In the case of Alemannia Aachen against the 1st FC Nürnberg in 2003 after coin tower against guest coach Wolfgang Wolf, the first “ghost game” of DFB history even followed.
VfL Bochum itself was involved in the youngest scandal: In the game against Gladbach on March 19, 2022, line judge Christian Gittelmann was hit by a beer cup in Bochum, the game was canceled at 2-0 for the guests and also evaluated later. As the only case without any consequence, the Snickers throw against Oliver Reck on February 7, 1998. Reck wanted to have felt a “stinging pain on the neck” at 1: 3 in Leverkusen – but Werder did not protest.