I don't know why you are so sure. Nobody else seems to think so.Rules have been broken, the relevant sanctions have been applied. CAS are unlikely to tell uefa that their rules are crap and should be ignored. As it happens on a footballing front I would not be unhappy at all if Legia were reinstated, I am all for the best team going through, I just can't see how it can happen, uefa would be opening up a massive can of worms if they let Legia back in.
I'm not sure. I have no idea. But it seems to me that there is a high chance that
one of these things might be true:
1) There is a badly translated section which caused the confusion which led to the player being improperly registered.
2) The CAS will rule that, as Legia intended to comply with the rules (the player did not play the relevant games) and did not know the rules were being broken, the punishment does not fit the crime. This is why it is different to that Swiss team ignoring UEFA's rules and playing illegible players for half a season. Legia tried to comply with the rules.
3) The player's participation did not affect the result in any way. He came on with a few minutes to go, with Celtic having little to no hope of entertaining a come back. The punishment therefore doesn't fit the crime.
4) The player
was punished. The club not using him for the relevant matches was punishment, regardless of his name being down on the squad sheet.
Basically, I can't think of a situation where the punishment would stand. The only one of relative equality might be Milan failing to put a player in the "B squad" and instead putting him in their "A squad" for the Champions League last year. Because they did that, another player was denied the chance to join the A squad (who couldn't join the B squad), and participate in the Champions League.
West Ham with Tevez and Mascherano? Completely different. But remember this:
In April 2007, West Ham admitted to breaching Premier League rules B13 and U18. Rule B13 states that all Premier League clubs should act in good faith, while U18 relates to third party influence. The commission fined West Ham £5.5 million, but did not dock the club points.
The Premier League also allowed Carlos Tevez to continue playing. Sheffield United were unsuccessful in appealing this decision with both a Premier League independent commission and the High Court. They then took the matter up through the FA's arbitration procedure last August. The ruling in Sheffield United's favour was released to the two clubs last Friday.
A directions hearing will be held next week and it is expected to be several months before the arbitration panel rules on any final compensation figure. Sheffield United want just over £30 million. However, with West Ham now exploring other available legal options, such as appealing to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) or even Fifa, the already interminable fall-out from their signings of Carlos Tevez and Javier Mascherano could now easily continue into next year.
What is CAS?
The Court of Arbitration for Sport is an international arbitration body set up to settle disputes related to sports. Its headquarters are in Lausanne. It was originally conceived by International Olympic Committee President Juan Antonio Samaranch to deal with disputes arising during the Olympics. It was established as part of the IOC in 1984. Ten years later, CAS underwent reforms to make itself more independent of the IOC, both organisationally and financially.
Rule K5c
Rule K is the FA procedure by which clubs can have a dispute heard by an independent arbitration tribunal. However, even though West Ham had no choice but to accept the arbitration process, Rule K5c would suggest that the decision is binding.
It says that by signing up to arbitration, "the parties shall be deemed to have waived irrevocably any right to appeal, review or any recourse to a court of law."
So did Tevez make a difference?
- Key games
It is clearly a subjective question, but the key period was the final 10 matches of the season, when Tevez scored seven times. Until then, he had not scored for West Ham. His goals could be argued to have changed the results in the 2-1 win against Blackburn, the 3-1 victory against Bolton and the 1-0 win against Manchester United.
So, even with Tevez and Mascherano, even though West Ham clearly broke the rules.. they weren't simply handed 3-0 losses for every time the two players played. They weren't simply relegated next season. And again, that wasn't an Admin error. That was a very serious breach of the rules.
What about all those transfers that go past the deadline? How often has FIFA/UEFA allowed them because they "tried to submit the paperwork in time but the fax machine was broken".
The player WAS punished. Using the player didnt affect the result. It was a simple admin error. The club intended to comply. "Not knowing the rules is no excuse," but attempting to comply with them usually does get you some leeway.