The Bundesliga game of the 1st FC Union Berlin against Bochum will finally be rated 2-0 in favor of the Bochum after the lighter throw on VfL goalkeeper Patrick Drewes. According to information from the “German Press Agency”, the constant arbitration court judged four months after the scandal game, which actually ended 1-1.
The arbitral tribunal confirmed the judgments of the sports and Federal Court of the German Football Association. An official announcement by the DFB is expected during the day.
For the bottom of the table from Bochum, the judgment is something like the last glimmer of hope in the relegation battle. After the second leg against Union ended 1-1 on Sunday, the VfL can hardly be saved. The team of coach Dieter Hecking is currently four points behind the relegation rank. Should Bochum lose the showdown in Heidenheim on Friday, the seventh Bundesliga relegation would be determined.
The Berliners, on the other hand, have long since secured the relegation. For them, the decision is meaningless from a sporting point of view.
The constant arbitration tribunal is responsible for all disputes between a professional club and the German Football Association or the German Football League.
Non -aggression pact in injury time
The game in the stadium on the old forestry was interrupted on December 14th in the 92nd minute for more than 25 minutes after the Bochum goalkeeper Drewes had been hit by a lighter thrown out of the Union block and had to get off the field.
The game was then continued and ended by referee Martin Petersen without Drewes. Since Bochum had already exhausted his replacement quota, attacker Philipp Hofmann briefly went into the goal. Both teams only fits the ball back and forth in a non -aggression pact to end the encounter.
Union accuses Drewes acting
The DFB sports court initially ruled in January that Drewes had been injured by the lighter on the head and Bochum was weakened. Therefore, even a game drop would have been justified. The DFB Federal Court also rejected Berlin’s appeal in February and confirmed the first judgment.
The Berliners more or less directly accused Drewes acting. “We did not get the corresponding clues for a special acting contribution from Mr. Drewes or for a plot or a lubrication comedy,” said sports court Stephan Oberholz.