Celtic fined 25,000 and Dida banned for 2 games

I think.

Bother fines are very lenient.

Celtic have got off lightly there.

I think Dida and Milan lose out most, which in some ways is ironic as it all began because a Celtic fan ran out on the pitch.

But i think its a fair ending to ridiculous antics.

I actually think Dida should have gotten a 6 match ban.

But, Celtic, wow, they were REALLY LET OFF THE HOOK!

Disgrace from UEFA as always, Celtic should have had a much bigger fine and their ground closed.

its a typical fine for something like this though i think, not that i agree. it sort of condones what the guy did cos ddia got badly done comapred to the fenians

THE CULPRIT IS NOT DIDA
10/11/2007 7:58:00 PM
After Uefa's sentence, Milan officially announce they will appeal as the Milan lawyer considers the decision unbalanced. Leandro Cantamessa reflects on the reasons why Milan were absolved.

MILAN - Uefa's official website, uefa.com, gave the news as follows: AC Milan's goalkeeper Dida has been suspended for two UEFA club competition matches by UEFA's Control and Disciplinary Body following events at last week's UEFA Champions League Group D game between Celtic FC and Milan in Glasgow. The proceedings had been instigated on the basis of Article 5, paragraph 1 of the UEFA disciplinary regulations (Principles of conduct), under which "member associations, clubs, as well as their players, officials and members, shall conduct themselves according to the principles of loyalty, integrity and sportsmanship". Celtic, meanwhile, have been fined €35,760 (CHF60,000) after being found guilty of a lack of organisation and improper conduct by supporters at the match (Articles 6 and 11c of the UEFA disciplinary regulations). Half of this amount is deferred for a probational period of two years. This means that Celtic pay a €17,847 fine now, and if a similar offence is committed over the next two years, the other half will be added on for the new infringement. Appeals may be lodged within three days of the sending of the reasoned decision. Celtic won the game 2-1 on 3 October.

Soon after the news, came Milan's official note: A.C. Milan comunicate they will appeal to the Uefa Appeal Commission against the two-match ban inflicted on its player Nelson Dida.

At around 19.00 Ansa gave out the reaction of Milan's lawyer Leandro Cantamessa: "It's a completely eccessive ban so we will certainly appeal against it. We think it is a very unbalanced sentence - Cantamessa added - They made it seem like Dida was the main protagonist, but it was someone else, and from a logical point of view this isn't correct. Moreover, Milan were absolved because Dida told the doctor he was dizzy and had to be substituted. So he must have had something... I was worried - he concluded - that the team itself would be punished, which would have been horrendous and unjustified. At least that did not happen."

---

acmilan.com

I don't follow how it is unbalanced. No one has taken into account the life ban for the dickhead that started all this.

robert wrote:I don't follow how it is unbalanced. No one has taken into account the life ban for the dickhead that started all this.

UEFA has to punish the club, not the individual....

Both Celtic and Dida got off with an extremely light punishment, wait till something like this happens in Holland or Portugal : they'll throw the book at us.

That's what surprised me though, Axe. Scotland are a small federation too, even smaller than Holland or Portugal.

kas wrote:That's what surprised me though, Axe. Scotland are a small federation too, even smaller than Holland or Portugal.

They're flying under EPL cover....and if the UEFA had thrown the book at Celtic they also would have had to give harsher punishment to their darling Milan...

Can I ask Axe, why the 8 of spades?

Been bothering me for a while. It's such a middle of the range card.

Parks lives wrote:Can I ask Axe, why the 8 of spades?

Been bothering me for a while. It's such a middle of the range card.

There are different schools for special or "beer"-cards, most common is the seven of diamonds.

...a bridgeclub of students in Utrecht (sisterclub to my own) holds the belief that the eight of spades is a special card. It will be singleton more times than any other card (according to them) and they made it a sport to do special things with it (making the last trick with it will earn you a bear for example).

I have won the special eight of spades price at their tournaments two times and have thereafter been converted to their beliefs....driving all my bridgepartners crazy when I invest extra time in developing a strategy that will allow me to make the final trick with the eight of spades (even at high level official matches).

It's just a way to have some extra fun and make the easy game of bridge *cough* just a little bit harder and more interesting

Parks lives wrote:Can I ask Axe, why the 8 of spades?

Been bothering me for a while. It's such a middle of the range card.

Googling "the eight of spades" led me to this nonsense :

http://www.worldhealing.net/freereading/eightspades.html

The powercard of powercards


So there you have it : there are always people who are more lost than you are

fair punishment i think. im gathering these are the next 2 milan champions league games?.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/europe/7049010.stm
reduced to a one match ban

Joke. They've made his punishment almost as bad as Celtic's now.

I don't see why it's a joke...retroactive suspensions for diving/simulation based on video evidence is not that common (off the top of my head I can only think of Rivaldo in WC 2002) so for him to get any sort of ban is enough IMO.

kas wrote:I don't see why it's a joke...retroactive suspensions for diving/simulation based on video evidence is not that common (off the top of my head I can only think of Rivaldo in WC 2002) so for him to get any sort of ban is enough IMO.

It has been given though, so why now reduce it?

On what grounds?

i do think 2 was too much, it was almost as if they knew milan would appeal so by making it 2 they could give a bit back to meelan and still have a ban in place

He was trying to get Celtic banned from the competition on purpuse, seems that the severity of that warrants more than just a 1 match ban....

Parks lives wrote:

kas wrote:I don't see why it's a joke...retroactive suspensions for diving/simulation based on video evidence is not that common (off the top of my head I can only think of Rivaldo in WC 2002) so for him to get any sort of ban is enough IMO.

It has been given though, so why now reduce it?

On what grounds?

I too would love to see the basis for it, then it might that I'm wrong. But reductions on appeal are pretty common.

Plus UEFA probably figured it'll make for a more interesting competition if Milan play Dida more often

kas wrote:

Parks lives wrote:

kas wrote:I don't see why it's a joke...retroactive suspensions for diving/simulation based on video evidence is not that common (off the top of my head I can only think of Rivaldo in WC 2002) so for him to get any sort of ban is enough IMO.

It has been given though, so why now reduce it?

On what grounds?

I too would love to see the basis for it, then it might that I'm wrong. But reductions on appeal are pretty common.

Plus UEFA probably figured it'll make for a more interesting competition if Milan play Dida more often

Except if its a Dutch club. We are scapegoated without appeal.

How come Feyenoord are still banned!?

DD wrote:How come Feyenoord are still banned!?

The-Frank-Tavern wrote:

DD wrote:How come Feyenoord are still banned!?

legitemate question, seeing:
1) they warned the frogs and their policeforce well ahead
2) did their part of the deal
3) turned out they had at best a minor role (simply due to some of the hooligans were dutch)
4) policeforce and the french club were majority responsible

-> Dutch club unfairly made 'example' of.

Not only have the results of the investigations showed that it is 90% the frogs' fault, they weren't punished at all, and feyenoord were punished twice! First a hefty fine (initial punishment), then a UEFA official decided to make a carreer move by prosecuting Feyenoord. Feyenoord were scapegoated without appeal - special detail considering that the investigation confirmed that they weren't to blame. Certainly not to be banned.

It all was politics because in the prreceding week the french chased a cuople of Israeli's into a McDonald and a cop shot a hooligan dead.

100% Scapegoated.