Arbitration Board reduces Trabzonspor's penalty

The decisions taken by the Arbitration Board following today's meeting are as follows:

"10. E.2024/183 - K.2024/174 (SUPPLEMENTARY)

The appeal by Fenerbahçe Futbol A.Ş. regarding its players Jayden Quinn Oosterwolde and İrfan Can Eğribayat against the PFDK decision dated 03.04.2024 and numbered E.2023-2024/1009 - K.2023-2024/1270 has been examined. It has been observed that the execution was stayed at the Arbitration Board's meeting on 03.04.2024, the reasoned decision of the PFDK was sent on 04.04.2024, and a detailed petition of appeal was submitted by the Applicant Club; the examination on the merits has commenced. As a result of the deliberation;

- When the events that occurred after the match are evaluated as a whole, the imposition of penalties at the lower limit in the sentences given to Jayden Quinn Oosterwolde and İrfan Can Eğribayat without considering the manner in which the event took place, and the reduction of the penalty by applying the provisions of unjust provocation when it was not possible to apply such provisions, were discussed within the framework of the system envisaged by the FDT (Football Disciplinary Instructions); with the dissenting opinion and votes of some members who argued that the actions fell within the scope of assault, and also considering the prohibition of reformatio in peius (prohibition of worsening the situation upon appeal), the ruling has been established as follows.

- Regarding the punishment of Fenerbahçe Futbol A.Ş. player Jayden Quinn Oosterwolde with a fine of 39,000.00 TL pursuant to Articles 36/2 and 35/4 of the FDT due to his unsportsmanlike conduct towards the opposing team's stands, and with a 1-match ban from official competitions and a fine of 13,000.00 TL pursuant to Articles 45/1-a, 35/4, and Article 12 of the FDT due to fighting with opposing team fans; the appeal, which was not found to be well-founded, has been rejected and the decision has been upheld, by majority vote,

- Regarding the punishment of Fenerbahçe Futbol A.Ş. player İrfan Can Eğribayat with a 1-match ban from official competitions and a fine of 13,000.00 TL pursuant to Articles 45/1-a, 35/4, and Article 12 of the FDT due to fighting with opposing team fans; the appeal, which was not found to be well-founded, has been rejected and the decision has been upheld, by majority vote,

Dissenting Opinion: Considering that only players and referees are present on the green pitch where football is played, that coaches, managers, and substitute players cannot enter this area without permission from the referee, that it is never possible for fans to enter the green pitch, that in this state the green pitch is a specially protected, inviolable area for players and referees, that all kinds of security measures must be taken by the host club and relevant administrative authorities to prevent entry onto the green pitch, that this responsibility of the host team regarding the safety of the pitch, players, referees, the visiting team, and the stadium is in the legal sense a "strict liability," that players and referees take the field with the assurance that their own safety is provided by the host team and administrative authorities and play football with this confidence, and that accepting the opposite would make the game of football unplayable;

I do not agree with the majority opinion, as I am of the opinion that it should have been decided that there was no place for sentencing regarding Fenerbahçe A.Ş. football club players İrfan Can Eğribayat and Jayden Quinn Oosterwolde, given that after the intense throwing of foreign, flammable, and explosive materials by host team fans that hit their players, technical staff, and the assistant referee throughout the match, the Fenerbahçe A.Ş. players were celebrating in the center of the field—which is far from the stands and safer—after defeating the host team at the end of the match, when host team fans entered the green pitch, where they should never have been, and attacked the physical integrity of the Fenerbahçe A.Ş. players, and the players entered the green pitch and defended themselves in a manner proportionate to the attacks made to protect themselves and their teammates from the host team fans and coach who were attacking them, eliminating the serious and active attack directed at their physical integrity as a reflex; and that although there is no provision for legitimate defense in the Football Disciplinary Instructions, the provision of legitimate defense regulated in Article 25/1 of the Turkish Penal Code No. 5237, which has an area of application pursuant to Article 19 of the Arbitration Board Instructions, should be interpreted within the framework of Articles 4/2-4 of the Football Disciplinary Instructions and applied in favor of the players who committed the disciplinary violation, evaluating their efforts to repel the existing unjust attack directed at their physical integrity by responding at the same level as a state of compliance with the law.

15. E.2024/188 - K.2024/187

The appeal by Trabzon Spor A.Ş. against the PFDK decision dated 03.04.2024 and numbered E.2023-2024/1009 - K.2023-2024/1269 has been examined. As a result of the deliberation;

- The 6-match ban from playing home games without spectators and the 3,000,000.00 TL fine imposed at the discretion and as a result of the pitch incidents caused by Trabzon Spor A.Ş. fans pursuant to Article 52/2 of the FDT have been lifted; Trabzon Spor A.Ş. has been punished with a 4-match ban from playing home games without spectators and a fine of 448,000.00 TL, taking into account the manner in which the event occurred, its beginning, development, and conclusion, pursuant to Article 52/2 of the FDT due to the pitch incidents caused by its fans, by majority vote,

- It has been decided unanimously that the appeal regarding the blocking of electronic tickets of spectators located in the Batı Alt VIP Platinum C, Socios.Com Tra Fan Token Doğu Alt Tribünü Doğu Alt J, I, and Kuzey Kale Arkası Kuzey Alt J blocks, who were involved in the pitch incidents, pursuant to Article 52/3 of the FDT, to prevent their entry into the next home match, is rejected and the decision is upheld, as it is understood that there is no error in terms of proof, legal qualification, and determination of the penalty."