La final del mundo, pt. 2
Today, CONMEBOL ruled that the game between Boca Juniors and River Plate should be played on December 8 or 9 – and not in Argentina.
And so, one year early, CONMEBOL is achieving its goal of staging the Copa Libertadores final in a neutral venue.
♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦
It’s now publicly established that Boca’s president has been lobbying for River to be disqualified and for the title to be awarded to Boca by default.
In response, River’s president has expressed shock at this betrayal.
So much for collegiality.
♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦
Of course, a few years ago, Boca was disqualified from the Copa Libertadores because its fans misbehaved against River. But on that occasion, the misbehavior occurred (1) during an earlier round rather than during the final, and (2) inside Boca’s stadium rather than on a public highway.
♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦
I, personally, would welcome River’s disqualification.
Not as eye-for-an-eye retribution. The earlier incident and this year’s are too dissimilar.
And not as a deterrent against future fan violence, either. It’s doubtful whether previous deterrent measures in Argentina have been very effective.
No, in this case, I think the expressivist or reprobative justification of punishment holds the greatest promise. The punishment would be justifiable as an expression of society’s disapproval of the fans’ misdeeds.
♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦
This theory of punishment also would be compatible with the imposition of some lesser (but still significant) penalty against River. For example, River’s home game might be played in an empty stadium.
I don’t think that staging the game in front of spectators in a neutral stadium would adequately express reprobation, however.
♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦
Update, Thursday: CONMEBOL has decided that the game will be played on December 9 – in Madrid.
Madrid.
MADRID.
Madrid, Spain. The one in Europe.
First, CONMEBOL plotted to remove South America’s nations tournament (the Copa América) from South America, and now it’s doing the same thing with South America’s main club tournament.
Stephen says: “The Copa LIBERTADORES final will be in … Spain?”
(Shakes head.)
“Back to the colonizadores.”
♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦
Update, Friday: River Plate and Boca Juniors have both rejected CONMEBOL’s ruling.
River will appeal its stadium ban. The current ruling moves this year’s final game away from River’s stadium. It also bans the stadium from hosting spectators during its next two CONMEBOL tournament games.
I’m not sure to whom River will direct its appeal – perhaps to the dreaded Tribunal arbitral du sport (TAS).
Boca has announced that it plans to appeal to the TAS after its initial appeal to CONMEBOL is rejected. Boca will argue that River should be expulsed from this year’s Copa Libertadores.
My previous discussion of this case was philosophic and casuistic. Boca, helpfully, has now communicated which of CONMEBOL’s disciplinary regulations it will cite in its appeal.
I think that much will hinge upon article 8.2:
More contentious will be what counts as the “immediate vicinity” of the stadium. The expression is vague. Over how many streets did River’s responsibility extend? Did the misbehavior occur inside or outside the club’s geographic area of responsibility? These questions reinvite casuistic interpretation, which isn’t especially likely to favor Boca, since, in the earlier case in which Boca was disqualified and River benefited, the misdeeds were performed inside the stadium.
The same interpretive problem arises with respect to article 13.2.f, which refers to “the stadium and its surroundings.”
Article 18.1 details the various penalties that may be imposed. However, it leaves the choice of penalty up to CONMEBOL. Here, too, Boca must make a casuistic argument for the imposition of a severe penalty. And in fact, in the last paragraph of its communiqué, Boca does insist that CONMEBOL’s rules should “be applied to all clubs equally.” Presumably, the club has in mind the ruling that was brought against it a few years ago which disqualified it from that edition of the Copa Libertadores.
♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦
No matter how the dispute between the clubs should turn out, it’s sad that they aren’t uniting to protest the tourney’s removal to Spain, though they both oppose it.
And so, one year early, CONMEBOL is achieving its goal of staging the Copa Libertadores final in a neutral venue.
♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦
It’s now publicly established that Boca’s president has been lobbying for River to be disqualified and for the title to be awarded to Boca by default.
In response, River’s president has expressed shock at this betrayal.
So much for collegiality.
♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦
Of course, a few years ago, Boca was disqualified from the Copa Libertadores because its fans misbehaved against River. But on that occasion, the misbehavior occurred (1) during an earlier round rather than during the final, and (2) inside Boca’s stadium rather than on a public highway.
♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦
I, personally, would welcome River’s disqualification.
Not as eye-for-an-eye retribution. The earlier incident and this year’s are too dissimilar.
And not as a deterrent against future fan violence, either. It’s doubtful whether previous deterrent measures in Argentina have been very effective.
No, in this case, I think the expressivist or reprobative justification of punishment holds the greatest promise. The punishment would be justifiable as an expression of society’s disapproval of the fans’ misdeeds.
♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦
This theory of punishment also would be compatible with the imposition of some lesser (but still significant) penalty against River. For example, River’s home game might be played in an empty stadium.
I don’t think that staging the game in front of spectators in a neutral stadium would adequately express reprobation, however.
♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦
Update, Thursday: CONMEBOL has decided that the game will be played on December 9 – in Madrid.
Madrid.
MADRID.
Madrid, Spain. The one in Europe.
First, CONMEBOL plotted to remove South America’s nations tournament (the Copa América) from South America, and now it’s doing the same thing with South America’s main club tournament.
Stephen says: “The Copa LIBERTADORES final will be in … Spain?”
(Shakes head.)
“Back to the colonizadores.”
♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦
Update, Friday: River Plate and Boca Juniors have both rejected CONMEBOL’s ruling.
River will appeal its stadium ban. The current ruling moves this year’s final game away from River’s stadium. It also bans the stadium from hosting spectators during its next two CONMEBOL tournament games.
I’m not sure to whom River will direct its appeal – perhaps to the dreaded Tribunal arbitral du sport (TAS).
Boca has announced that it plans to appeal to the TAS after its initial appeal to CONMEBOL is rejected. Boca will argue that River should be expulsed from this year’s Copa Libertadores.
My previous discussion of this case was philosophic and casuistic. Boca, helpfully, has now communicated which of CONMEBOL’s disciplinary regulations it will cite in its appeal.
I think that much will hinge upon article 8.2:
Las Asociaciones Miembro y clubes son responsables de la seguridad y del orden tanto en el interior como en las inmediaciones del estadio, antes, durante y después del partido del cual sean anfitriones u organizadores. Esta responsabilidad se extiende a todos los incidentes que de cualquier naturaleza pudieran suceder, encontrándose por ello expuestos a la imposición de las sanciones disciplinarias y cumplimiento de las órdenes e instrucciones que pudieran adoptarse por los órganos judiciales.Why does this rule refer to “member associations?” In this case, the pertinent association is the Argentine Football Association (AFA). Should the rule be interpreted as implying that the AFA and River are jointly responsible for what occurred? Probably not. The rule probably means that member associations are responsible for the security and order of the games that they host that don’t involve club teams.
[Translation, with key phrases italicized:] Member associations and clubs are responsible for security and order – inside and in the immediate vicinity of the stadium – before, during, and after the game which they host or organize. This responsibility extends itself to all incidents that might occur, of whatever nature. Member associations and clubs thereby find themselves exposed to the imposition of disciplinary sanctions and to compliance with the orders and instructions adopted by judicial organs.
More contentious will be what counts as the “immediate vicinity” of the stadium. The expression is vague. Over how many streets did River’s responsibility extend? Did the misbehavior occur inside or outside the club’s geographic area of responsibility? These questions reinvite casuistic interpretation, which isn’t especially likely to favor Boca, since, in the earlier case in which Boca was disqualified and River benefited, the misdeeds were performed inside the stadium.
The same interpretive problem arises with respect to article 13.2.f, which refers to “the stadium and its surroundings.”
Article 18.1 details the various penalties that may be imposed. However, it leaves the choice of penalty up to CONMEBOL. Here, too, Boca must make a casuistic argument for the imposition of a severe penalty. And in fact, in the last paragraph of its communiqué, Boca does insist that CONMEBOL’s rules should “be applied to all clubs equally.” Presumably, the club has in mind the ruling that was brought against it a few years ago which disqualified it from that edition of the Copa Libertadores.
♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦
No matter how the dispute between the clubs should turn out, it’s sad that they aren’t uniting to protest the tourney’s removal to Spain, though they both oppose it.