Arsenal set to appeal Eduardo's twomatch ban by Uefa for dive against Celtic

01 September 2009 16:57
The club had earlier presented a detailed 19-page submission to Uefa's 10-man control and disciplinary body but, following a meeting via teleconference, it was decided that Eduardo was guilty of deceiving the referee in winning a penalty last Wednesday against Celtic. The Croatian now stands to miss the group matches against Standard Liege and Olympiakos. There is, however, a mixture of bemusement and extreme frustration at the Emirates over both the treatment of Eduardo and the way Uefa has suddenly applied its rules. Having carefully assessed the video evidence, Arsenal also dispute the accusation that Eduardo was guilty of a deliberate dive. Arsenal are expected to receive full details of Uefa's decision on Thursday and will then have three days in which to decide whether to appeal. 'We have been informed that we will receive a 'reasoned decision' from Uefa,' said a club statement. 'We believe it is imperative that Uefa's explanation for its decision provides clear and comprehensive standards that will be consistently enforced. It is also critical that Uefa provides specific details of the processes it plans to adopt in reviewing all games under its jurisdiction.' Although Eduardo clearly went to ground easily — and Arsene Wenger admitted that it was not a penalty — Arsenal believe they have grounds to protest at a number of different levels. Above all, there is shock that, without any prior warning to the competing clubs, Uefa have decided to stringently adopt Article 10 (1c) of the disciplinary regulations which states that a player can be suspended 'for acting with the obvious intent to cause any match official to make an incorrect decision or supporting his error of judgment'. The rule was introduced in 2006 and, since then, the only player to have been charged is Lithuania international Saulius Mikoliunas. The wording of the rule means it could also apply to contested throw-ins, corners, offsides and fouls that occur over the pitch. Arsenal wonder whether Uefa have been applying this rule to other European matches under their jurisdiction and, if so, whether someone is analysing all the hours of footage. If not, they will want to know why Uefa have acted on an incident that gained a particularly high media profile. Arsenal have also pointed to Article 20 (1) of Uefa's rules, which appears to contradict the entire process. It says: 'Decisions made by the referee on the field of play are final and may not be reviewed by Uefa's disciplinary bodies.' On the actual incident, Arsenal contend that 'there is a deviation in the right ankle of his [Eduardo's] right foot. This supports his contention that there was contact from the goalkeeper and the committee is encouraged to review this footage'. Arsenal have also pointed out that Eduardo, who suffered a horrific leg injury against Birmingham in February 2008, had been taught like any footballer to raise their feet to avoid a collision. 'Even if a player acts successfully to avoid contact this is not cheating,' said Arsenal's submission. The matter is now likely to move to Uefa's appeals committee, who could overturn the suspension or recommend that it is down-graded to one match. Arsenal's original submission to Uefa said that it was 'arbitrary and unreasonable' to single out Eduardo and Wenger has already accused football's European governing body of conducting 'a witchhunt'. Uefa believes that the decision to punish Eduardo is consistent with its own 'Respect' campaign which encourages fair-play in football. Arsenal suspect the charge was only drawn up on Friday after the Uefa president, Michel Platini, has been asked about the incident by journalists at the Champions League draw. Croatia FA president Vlatko Markovic said: "Eduardo didn't fall theatrically. There was some contact at first and he fell afterwards. Besides Eduardo has such a light physical build that he can be knocked over by a strong gust of wind. But Eduardo is not such a person or such a type that would be capable of simulating."

Source: Telegraph