[ad_1]
The midweek round of the Brazilian Championship did not need many games to guarantee the quota of controversy linked to the referees. The main and loudest of them occurred in the 1-1 draw between Ceará in São Paulo, this Wednesday (25), in Fortaleza. An alleged right-wing error by the referee on the field annulled São-Paulino Pablo’s goal and opened the gap for a request to annul the result.
On the occasion, assistant Thiago Rosa de Oliveira (RJ) pointed out the irregular position of the tricolor forward and annulled the goal in the field. However, Wagner do Nascimento Magalhães (Fifa / RJ) confirmed the goal when ordered by the VAR, led by Carlos Eduardo Nunes Braga (RJ), with the help of William Machado Steffen (SC) and Daniel do Espirito Santo Parro (RJ) ). The problem is that the same VAR was corrected minutes later and the bid was canceled. With a specific detail -and prohibited: the goal was definitely invalidated after the referee had already authorized the resumption of the match, with Ceará giving the ball. Such breach of arbitration pointed to a possible error of law.
OR sports I listened to experts linked to the STJD and the arbitration to explain the case, tell why a request can be generated to cancel the match and what would be the steps to make this happen.
Why this error can cause the cancellation of the game?
An error in the arbitration can lead to the challenge of the result in the field when it is an error of law: when the judge shows ignorance of the rule or applies it badly. According to what was verified in the field, this is what was supposed to have happened, with Wagner do Nascimento Magalhães reforming a decision, guided by the VAR, after the resumption of the match.
The case is different from those in which the complaint is due to a factual error, when there is an eventual error of interpretation, but without ignorance of the norm or without applying it. In such cases, the STJD does not even proceed with the evaluation of the application, rejecting it immediately.
Who can make this request?
Said request for nullification of the result due to an error of law will only be judged in the legal sphere – in this case, the Superior Court of Justice (STJD) of football – upon request of one of the teams involved in the game or of any team that interests direct on the outcome of the duel.
“Natural or legal persons who have played the match, test or equivalent in each modality, or who have an immediate and demonstrated interest in its result, are legitimate to promote the challenge, provided that they participate in the same competition”, says paragraph 1 of subsection II of article 84 of the Code of Sports Justice of Brazil (CBJD).
In this case, it should be mentioned that the STJD Prosecutor’s Office does not have competence to file a complaint about the case. It will be up to one of the clubs involved to speak up and file a complaint.
How would such a claim for annulment be judged?
“The request for challenge must be addressed to the President of the Court [STJD, no caso], in two copies duly signed by the challenged or by an attorney with special powers, accompanied by documentation that proves the alleged facts and proof of payment of the fee, limited to the following hypotheses: modification of the result; departure cancellation, voucher or equivalent. […] The President of the Court, upon receiving the challenge, will immediately inform the President of the respective sports administration entity about the opening of the process, so that he does not approve the result of the match, test or equivalent until the final decision of the challenge, ”he explains. Article. 84 of the CBJD.
As it is a complaint based on a possible error of law and attending previous cases presented before the STJD, the trend is to continue the case, with the request for annulment being evaluated by one of the disciplinary commissions of the court.
For now, however, no projection can be made about the outcome of the mess. Not even a statement is made about the occurrence of the error of law.
“We have no way of speaking. We need to analyze a whole context. Was it a communication gap? Was it ignorance? What was it? Just analyze all parties to make a decision. Canceling a match is not simple. We need to have a base. be firm to speak. If there is a question, the Court will analyze all this. If there is an error in law, let it be judged. If there is any other element that we do not know yet that proves otherwise, they will also evaluate it, “said the ombudsman. arbitration board of CBF Manoel, Serapião.
Claim period
The challenge will only be evaluated if it is filed with the STJD within two days after the summary is entered in the CBF. São Paulo, affected by the appointment, has not yet informed whether it will make the complaint.
